A mix method appraoch exploring the approaches for reducing crimnal recidivism among African American men - Essay Example

?SCIENTIFIC MERIT REVIEW FORM School of Public Service Leadership Scientific Merit Process Dissertation researchers will use this form to go through the process of scientific merit review (SMR). The goals of this process are to: (1) facilitate the planning of the details of your dissertation research project, (2) allow for scientific merit review and (3) facilitate your progress through the dissertation. This is not an addition to your dissertation but rather a step to assist you in obtaining mentor, committee, school, and IRB approval more efficiently. You must obtain scientific merit approval before writing your full dissertation proposal. Scientific merit approval is part of Dissertation Milestone 3, Mentor Approval. Scientific Merit Criteria The following criteria will be used to establish scientific merit. The purpose of the review will determine if the study: 1. Advances the scientific knowledge base. 2. Makes a contribution to research theory.   3. Meets certain “Hallmarks” of good research methodology. Scientific Merit Approval** Your SMR completed form will be approved, not approved, or deferred for major or minor revisions. The Scientific Merit Reviewer will use a check list to determine if the study meets the criteria for scientific merit and the reviewer will provide specific feedback designed to identify any issues that need to be resolved related to the scientific merit or the proposed methodology for the SMR form to be approved. You will have up to three opportunities to submit this form for SMR approval. Scientific Merit approval does not mean you will obtain IRB approval. The IRB review will focus on ethical issues. ** Obtaining Scientific Merit approval does not guarantee you will obtain IRB approval. A detailed ethical review will be conducted during the process of IRB approval. Recommendations for How to Use This Form This SMR form is intended to help you plan the details of your dissertation. It provides a space for you and your mentor to work out all the details of your design. Then it allows you to submit your design plan for Scientific Merit Review. Once you have obtained Scientific Merit approval, you should be able to easily expand on the information you have submitted here and write the dissertation proposal because the methodology section follows the Dissertation Chapter 3 outline. It is recommended that you use this form in a step-by-step way to help you plan your design. Expect that you will go through several revisions before your mentor approves this form. When you are completely done with your form and it has Mentor approval, your Mentor will submit it to your Scientific Merit Reviewer for approval. Do’s and Don’ts Do prepare your answers in a separate Word document, as editing and revising will be easier. Set font formatting to Times New Roman, 11 point, regular style font or Arial, 10 point, regular style font. Use the “Format” menu. Do set paragraph indentation (“Format” menu) for no indentation, no spacing. Do copy/paste items into the right-hand fields when they are ready. Don’t delete the descriptions in the left column! Don’t lock the form. That will stop you from editing and revising within the form. Do complete the “Learner and Program Information” (Section 1). Don’t skip items or sections. If an item does not apply to your study, type “NA” in its field; i.e., leave no blank spaces in the form. Do read the item descriptions and their respective Instructions carefully. Items request very specific information. Be sure you understand what is asked (Good practice for your IRB application!). Do use primary sources to the greatest extent possible as references. Textbooks (Patton, Leedy and Ormrod, etc.) are not acceptable as the only references supporting methodological and design choices. Use them to track down the primary sources. Do submit a revised SMR form if, after approval, you change your design elements. It may not need a second review, but the mentor should send any revisions to the Scientific Merit Reviewer before your IRB is submitted. Section 1. Learner and Program Information (to be completed by learner) Learner Name Learner Email Mentor Name Mentor Email Specialization Specialization Chair Email Dissertation Title Section 2. Research Problem & Contributions to Research Theory 2.1 Research Problem Write one sentence that describes the problem being addressed. When looked at from a statistically based point of view, recidivism from within the criminal justice system is at a high rate among African American men in the Washington D.C. area. 2.2 Advancing the Scientific Knowledge Base Specifically describe how this research will advance scientific knowledge in your specialization area by answering all of these 3 questions using bullet points and in-text citations. 1. Does the study address something that is not known or has not been studied before—How is this study new or different from other studies? This study will examine a specific regional area and target a racially and gender defined demographic. This study will be mixed methodology, which will mean that the statistical data that is created will also be supported by interviews which expand the understanding of the experiences that lead to repeat recidivism by African American males in Washington D.C. (Denzin & Lincoln, 2011). This study will support solutions that come from understanding the regional and demographic specific focus and help to frame the causes which will could then lead to reducing the effect of recidivism. 2. If your research questions are studied, how could your findings impact your field of interest—“So What?” This study could expand the understanding of what factors contribute to recidivism through a regionally focused study that will help to define the culture within Washington D. C as it contributes to the issue. Repeat offenses and multiple incarcerations are costly in both economic and social factors (Delisi & Conis, 2010). Victims of repeat offenders could be saved from the impact of crime if an understanding of the causes of recidivism led to solutions that lowered the rate. 3. What possible practical implications do you predict the results of your research will have? For instance, what will be the impact of these results on your sample, your site location, or your workplace—“Who Cares?” The number of victims of crimes could be decreased should the study lead to solutions. Law enforcement, government, and the judicial system could become more informed. Sociologists, anthropologists, criminologists, and any other discipline in which this type of information will broaden the understanding of recidivism and how it impacts their area of study. 2.3 Theoretical Foundation List the major theory or theories that serve as the backbone of the study. List each theory and a reference for each immediately below the theory. General Strain Theory: Siegel, L. J., & Welsh, B. (2009). Juvenile delinquency: Theory, practice, and law. Australia: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Self-Control Theory Williams, M. W. (2010). Self-control theory of crime. New York: Lambert Academic Publishing Social Learning Theory Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall. 2.4 Contribution to Research Theory Explain how your study answers one of these 4 questions. Provide a detailed explanation for at least one of the following questions: In what ways does the research test to confirm or refute theory? This research has the potential to confirm general strain theory, self-control theory, and social learning theory in ways in which to further explore those theories in relationship with the topic of study. The focus of the study is on how these theories relate to the incidents of recidivism in African American males in Washington D.C. and how this specific culture has contributed to increases that are observed in comparison to other demographic target groups. According to Hagan (2011), Robert Agnew promotes social strain theory in which he views strain ‘as due to negative relationships in which individuals feel that they are being mistreated” (p. 150). This research will show that not only do individuals with high levels of recidivism have a negative relationship within their social environment, but that they have a negative relationship with the state, thus they cannot easily integrate into meaningful and purposeful positive relationships with society. Self-control theory will be examined for the ways in which it is relevant to recidivism and to the cultural methods of how self-control is taught in regard to the laws of the state. In this case, it is expected that self-control theory will be shown to not be as relevant in regard to a broad set of recidivism in which acculturation has been done to the extent that criminal behavior is the expected set of behaviors over law-abiding behaviors. Where some crime is an example of self-control theory where it is the individual’s inability to control or restrain behavior, some crime is the result of social and cultural adaptations to hard circumstances that result in deviant behaviors from lawful conduct (Gottfredson & Hirschi, 2001). Where self-control theory is relevant on an individual basis, social learning theory explains a demographically relevant state of recidivism. According to Akers and Jensen (2007), macro-level explanations that reflect criminal behaviors will always break down to individual behaviors. Therefore, in understanding the sociological levels of behaviors, individual behavior will create a snapshot of the greater sets of conditions. Social learning theory provides for an understanding of behavior from the point of view of imitation (Nofziger, 2001). The way that people attain and acquire what they need for survival is taught, and in an atmosphere were criminal behaviors are the paths towards survival, individuals learn these methods of acquisition. This mixed methodology study will not only show some of the reasons why recidivism occurs at a high rate among African American males in Washington D.C., but will reveal the learned behaviors that make it more difficult to maintain behaviors that are within the law. 2.5 Research Questions List the research questions. The questions should align with the research problem. Be very specific here. PSL dissertations typically have between 2-6 research questions. Research Questions 1. What is the rate of recidivism among African American males in Washington D. C. and in what ways does this differ from other ethnic groups or other regions of the country? 2. What is the common thread of discourse among African American males who have been incarcerated on subsequent crimes after a release from prison on the reasons that they re-offend? 3. What stress factors contribute to strain theory as a way of understanding why offenders end up committing subsequent crimes and ending up in prison? 4. How does law enforcement prejudice contribute to higher rates of incarceration among African American males and does this figure into the higher rate of recidivism? 5. What social stress does prejudicial judicial systems, cultural systems of survival, and the sometimes adversarial relationship between the African American community and the state have on offenders in regard to lifestyles of criminal behavior? 6. Does social injustice in regard to prejudicial behavior have a higher impact on recidivism among African American males or does the cultural home environment have a higher influence on continuing criminal behavior within African American male cultures? Section 3. Methodology, Sampling, Ethics 3.1 Identify the variables (quantitative) or the concepts (qualitative) How do the variables or concepts align with the theories? Variables Measured: The variables measured that will be used are lack of family support, lack of employment/job skills, unresolved and untreated health challenges, social economic status, self-esteem, and religion/spirituality. Concepts Measured: Concepts measured will be peer pressure, community help, and immediate environment after released 3.2 General Methodology Choose the methodology you believe is most appropriate for this study. Indicate methodology by checking it below. ____ Quantitative ____ Qualitative __X__ Mixed Method 3.3 Methodological Approach Choose the specific approach you believe is appropriate for this study. If a mixed methods design, choose one approach in each category. Qualitative Approaches: (Case Study; Ethnography; Grounded Theory; Phenomenology; Heuristic) Chosen Approach: The methodology approach of a focus group will be used in the study and grounded theory will be used as a qualitative method for the study (Silverman, 2004: Vaughn, Schumm, & Sinagub, 1996). Quantitative Approaches: (Descriptive; Cross-Sectional; Longitudinal; Quasi-Experimental; Experimental) Chosen Approach: For the quantitative approach, multivariate analysis such as multiple regression analysis will be used to study the effect of the factors from survey results from within an experimental approach, contributing to the occurrence of recidivism 3.4 Rationale for Methodology Write a 1-2 sentence rationale describing how your design is best suited to answering your research questions. In order to understand the phenomenon of recidivism by African American males in the Washington D. C. area, a statistical analysis of data gathered from survey instruments and experiential information gathered from discussions with focus groups will provide a multi-dimensional study of the topic (Heppner, Kivlighan, & Wampold, 2008). 3.5 Assumptions Identify the key (A) theoretical, (B) topical, and (C) methodological assumptions of the study; provide citations to support their adoption. Assumptions that have been made before undertaking this research is first defined by the data that supports that African American males have a high rate of recidivism. According to the State of Washington Sentencing Guidelines Commission, 73% of all African American males who are released from prison end up going back for a second crime. The assumptions about the theories that are being used to frame the inquiry are that they are relevant to the topic. According to Tashakkori & Teddlie (2010) a mixed method approach provides an expanded understanding in which statistical data is enriched by experiential understandings. 3.6 Limitations Evaluate the weaknesses of your study at this time. Indicate areas to be improved before start of the study and areas that cannot be improved. Give reasons for not redesigning to address any of the limitations identified. The research will be limited through time, as the study will not be a longitudinal study in which the same offenders are studied over the course of many years. The study will also be limited by number of recidivists that will be available for the study. In attempting to study any topic of social relevance, the researcher must attempt to set aside personal bias, but there will always be some biases that cannot be fully set aside (Creswell & Plano, 2011). 3.7 Measures/Instruments List and describe each data collection instrument or measurement tool you will use. This includes questionnaires, formal interview protocols, forms, etc. Include (A) alignment with variable or concept (B) data type(s) generated by each measure, and (C) available psychometric information (including validity & reliability coefficients). Attach a copy of each instrument you plan to use as an appendix to your SMR. The measures/instruments that will be used are the Rosenberg Self Esteem Survey, Criminal Thinking (CTS) scale by Glenn Walters, and the Addiction Severity Index Multi-media Version Test. The Rosenberg Self Esteem Survey was originally designed for adolescent study in order to determine the sense of self and value that adolescence perceived. This study will perform the same function with a reliability of .93 (Abel, 2007). The CTS is a scale that has been shown to have a great deal of reliability in testing criminal lifestyle predictability as an offshoot of the Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form(Stohr, Walsh, & Hemmens, 2009). The difference between CTS and the LCSF is that the CTS can be used as a predictor, where the LCSF deals more with past acts and lifestyles (Walters, 2002). The Addiction Severity Index Multi-media Version Test is based on a 10-point scale in which addiction is measured through self-examination of frequency and severity of use. This instrument shows a reliability measure of anywhere from .62 to .84 (Miller, 2010). 3.8 If modifying an instrument: Describe any pilot test or field test that may be required for any instruments. Field tests must be done (A) for new instruments or questions developed by the learner, and (B) with expert panelists. Field tests require no IRB review required. A pilot test requires IRB review. There will be a pilot test conducted of at least five people for the qualitative and quantitate part of the study. The pilot test will be done to ensure that the variables can be compared for associations and that the questions within the qualitative study have relevant results (Mertens, 2010). 3.9 Population and Sampling Plan Describe the population of people or data in which your study is interested. Briefly describe the characteristics of this sample, including (A) demographics, (B) inclusion criteria if any; (C) exclusion criteria if any. Describe how you plan to select the sample. Include the steps you will take to recruit participants. Provide enough detail so that someone else would be able to follow this recipe to conduct the study. Provide rationale for your decisions. The sample population is between the ages of 18-60 males who are African Americans who live in Washington, DC. The characteristics will be ex-offenders who have experience three or more episodes of incarceration that exceeded a total of 24 months of incarceration. The sample population will be selected through a gatekeeper that will provide access to a group of people who represent the population that is to be studied (Oliver, 2003). The Director at the District of Columbia Court Services and Supervision Agency (CSOSA) will be addressed in order to gain access to those who are represented by this agency. 3.10 Sample Size What is the expected sample size needed? How do you know? Provide citations (primary sources) to support the sample size decision, (e.g., a power analysis, articles indicating effect size of scales, or citations justifying your qualitative sample size). The sample size for the qualitative research is 30 participants of 3 sessions of 10 people each. The expected sample size for quantitative analysis will be 127. The anticipated size effect is at .15 with 6 predictors. With an expected desired statistical power level at .90 and the probability level at .05, the participant size is at 123 (Soper, 2011). 3.11 Expected Site Describe the site(s) or source from which you expect to draw your sample. Expected site is the Community Action Group, a local community based inpatient substance abuse treatment facility that provides services to clients from the District of Columbia Court Services and Supervision Agency (CSOSA) More than 90% of their clients are referred from (CSOSA). This site is ideal site to collect surveys in more than 50% of their clients are repeated offenders. 3.12 Site Permission Who is authorized to provide permission to use this site or source? Does the site have an IRB? What do you need to do to obtain permission to access the population or data source? The director of the CSOSA will serve as the gatekeeper for the study and will be approached for formal authorization. The Director will get a copy of the inform consent and proposal and a copy of the consent from the IRB at Capella University. 3.13 Participant Contact How will potential participants first be contacted? How will participants be contacted following the study? There will be a target population survey and Key informant survey (International Rice Institute, 1991). The study will be posted in the agency and it is volunteer based participation. Contact will be maintained, both before and after, through the Director. 3.14 Data Collection Describe the exact procedure that will be used to carry out the study. This is a step-by-step description of exactly how the research will be conducted. This should read like a recipe for conducting your study. Be sure to include all the necessary details so that someone else should be able to follow this and be able to replicate the study. Permissions are sought and attained from the gatekeeper Notices are put out asking for volunteers Volunteers are assessed for admission into the study Participants are given consent forms Qualitative study is conducted through survey instruments Three separate focus groups are conducted Quantitative study is put into spread sheets Multivariate analysis is conducted Qualitative grids are assembled from observations and discussions Quantitative and Qualitative research is synthesized into common themes 3.15 Data Analysis Describe analysis procedures for each distinct data type: specific statistical analysis for quantitative studies; audiotapes, transcripts, video tape, field notes, photos, etc. for qualitative studies; or describe a combination of procedures for a mixed methods design. Ensure that the analysis is consistent with your chosen methodological approach. Describe all methods and procedures for data analysis including: (a) types of data to be analyzed, (b) organizing raw data, (c) managing and processing data, (d) preparation of data for analysis, and (e) storage and protection of data. For each research question or sub-question, detail the actual data analyses to be conducted to answer each specific question or how you plan to test each hypothesis. The analysis of the data will be undertaken through a mixed methodology which means that data will be gathered through survey instruments and then put through calculations software in order to create differing types of associations. Inverse design will be used so that the best possible flexibility will be available for assessing the variables. Multivariate regression analysis as well as canonical correlations analysis of the survey results will be used to determine relationships between the variables (Rencher, 2002). Data will be organized on Excel Spread sheets and a table that will act as a grid, with all physical data kept separately in a file box. 1. What is the rate of recidivism among African American males in Washington D. C. and in what ways does this differ from other ethnic groups or other regions of the country? 2. What is the common thread of discourse among African American males who have been incarcerated on subsequent crimes after a release from prison on the reasons that they re-offend? 3. What stress factors contribute to strain theory as a way of understanding why offenders end up committing subsequent crimes and ending up in prison? 4. How does law enforcement prejudice contribute to higher rates of incarceration among African American males and does this figure into the higher rate of recidivism? 5. What social stress does prejudicial judicial systems, cultural systems of survival, and the sometimes adversarial relationship between the African American community and the state have on offenders in regard to lifestyles of criminal behavior? 6. Does social injustice in regard to prejudicial behavior have a higher impact on recidivism among African American males or does the cultural home environment have a higher influence on continuing criminal behavior within African American male cultures? 3.16 Ethical Considerations. Describe any ethical considerations given the sample population and/or topic. Please explain as fully as possible. The study will be defined by ethical considerations of anonymity and consent. There is little to no risk involved with the administered survey and focus group methodology either to physical or mental health. The participants and the gatekeeper will all be fully informed and anyone will be able to leave the study at any time during the process. All participants will remain anonymous and will sign a consent form to ensure they have been fully informed (Oliver, 2003). 3.17 Risk Assessment. Is your study more than minimal risk? Refer to your CITI course for more information about minimal risk. Please explain. No: There is minimal risk in such format of participant based study. Yes: Scientific Merit Status Directions for Reviewers The reviewer determines if the Scientific Merit Review (SMR) form is approved, disapproved or deferred for major or minor revisions. An SMR form is approved if the reviewer has been able to answer “MET EXPECTATIONS” to all of the evaluation questions. A researcher has 3 opportunities to pass scientific merit review. If any of the items have been checked as “BELOW EXPECTATIONS,” then the reviewer is asked to comment specifically and provide recommendations. Most of the time recommendations will lead to the reviewer requesting major or minor revisions. Minor revisions are things like needing to include more detail. Major revisions are issues where there are major design flaws, potential ethical concerns or inconsistency in terms of the research questions, the design, and the proposed data analysis. Disapproval occurs if the researcher fails to pass the SMR review on the third attempt. Disapproval could also occur earlier in the process if it is clear that the study 1.) does not have any potential for scientific merit or 2.) the study has major ethical or methodological flaws that can’t be corrected. Please indicate your decision for this review in the correct place (First Review, Second Review, etc) and insert your electronic signature and the date below. If the SMR has a Final Status of “Approved” or “Disapproved”, please be sure to indicate this Final Scientific Merit Review status below as well. Scientific Reviewer Evaluation Criteria Met Expectations Below Expectations Reviewer Comments 1 Did the Specialization Chair approve the dissertation title, topic, and problem as appropriate for the specialization area? (2.1) 2 Will the study advance scientific knowledge in the field by meeting one of these four criteria? (2.2) 1. Does the study address something that is not known or has not been studied before? 2. Is this study new or different from other studies in some way? 3. Does the study extend prior research on the topic in some way? 4. Does the study fill a gap in the existing literature? 3 Does the research make a contribution to research theory in one of these ways? (2.3, 2.4) 1. Does the research generate a new theory? 2. Does the research refine or add to a new theory? 3. Does the research test to confirm or refute theory? 4. Does the research expand theory by telling us something new about application or processes? 4 Do the research questions address the research problem? (2.5) 5 Does the basic methodology and rationale proposed seem appropriate to answer the research questions? (3.2, 3.4) 6 Is the research design clearly and accurately described? Can the design answer the research questions with the proposed sample, design, and analysis? (3.5, 3.6, 3.7) 7 Are any concerns about using the particular population, sample, site or how participants will be contacted, sufficiently addressed by the methodology? (3.9, 3.10, 3.11, 3.12, 3.13) 8 Is participant involvement, selection, and recruitment fully described and appropriate for the study? (3.13) 9 Are all data collection instruments, measures, scales, interview questions or observations , appropriate for this study? Have field tests (if necessary) been described? (3.1, 3.8) 11 Does the researcher describe in detail the procedure to be followed in a step-by-step way so that it is completely clear how the research will be conducted? (3.14) 12 Are the proposed data analyses appropriate? Is there alignment between the research questions, proposed methodology, types of data to be collected and proposed data analysis? Is the language used to describe the type of design and data analysis plans consistent throughout? (3.15) 13 Have any potentially serious ethical concerns been considered and sufficiently addressed? (3.16) 14 Have risks been adequately identified? (3.17) Scientific Review Information (to be completed by Reviewer only) Reviewer Name: Date Decision First Review  Date Approved ____________________  Date Deferred _____________________ Rationale for Deferment (see comments on form)  Minor Revisions  Major Revisions Second Review (if needed)  Date Approved ____________________  Date Deferred _____________________ Rationale for Deferment (see comments on form)  Minor Revisions  Major Revisions Third Review (if needed)  Date Approved ____________________  Date Deferred _____________________ Rationale for Deferment (see comments on form)  Minor Revisions  Major Revisions Sent to Research Chair for Review and Consultation (if needed) Date: Research Chair Process Review Outcome (see attachments if needed) Conference Call  Date Approved ____________________  Date Deferred _____________________ Rationale for Deferment (see comments on form):  Minor Revisions  Major Revisions FINAL SCIENTIFIC MERIT STATUS  Approved Date Approved:_____________________________ Appendix A Sections of the Dissertation (& Corresponding Sections of the SMR Form) Elements from the Dissertation Guides Workbook prepared by Drs. Curtis Brant, Bruce Fischer, Malcolm Gray, Randy Johnson , Kim Kostere, Tony Levinskas, Bill Percy, and Nancy Piotrowski Dissertation Chapter One A. Background of the Problem (Introduction) (2.1) Identifies the wider issues underlying the research problem and question. Essentially a brief synopsis of the literature review (fully developed in Chapter Two of the dissertation) about the problem itself and the theoretical framework the researcher has chosen to evaluate the problem and the eventual data obtained about it. B. Statement of the Problem (2.1) Clearly states the research problem–the form of the problem that is the specific object of investigation in this study. The research problem is not the general social or psychological problem described in the Background section (which may require many different components for solution), but a specific problem that a research project is required to solve. C. Purpose of the Study (2.2, 2.4) The core purpose of the study is to answer the research question, whose purpose is to solve the research problem. The wider social or psychological problem (e.g., stopping or treating childhood abuse or developing effective management techniques for organizations) cannot be solved by a single research project. The research project, however, should be, and that is the core purpose of the study. Contributing knowledge toward a solution of the wider problem can be a second purpose. D. Significance of the Study (2.2, 2.4) Significance of the research is related both to what is known in the literature and the value of the training in research the learner is receiving as a result of completing the study. This section presents the argument that fulfilling the purpose of the study is important to the field of pubic service leadership, to some specialization within public service leadership, to a community of persons interested in the problem, or to researchers interested in the problem. E. Research Design (3.2) Describes the general blueprint for the study itself—how its elements (overall methodology, sample selection and assignment, data collection methods and procedures, data analysis methods, data presentation methods) are aligned and coordinated in order to maximize cogency and to reduce threats to validity or credibility. F. Research Question and Hypotheses (2.5) States exactly the question that the study will answer, including any sub-questions. The research question must include the variables or phenomena being investigated and their relationship (if any is sought). Hypotheses are predictive statements of the expected answers to the research sub-questions; qualitative projects do not use hypotheses. This meets criteria for a respectable research question: 1. It is a question. 2. It can be answered. 3. Because it is closely linked to a viable research problem (which in turn is linked to a wider problem which is important to some stakeholders), it has significance and has not already been answered. 4. It clearly identifies the variables and the relationships that will be investigated. 5. The question, if reduced to its keywords (management, management-by-objective, human potentials, worker morale, etc.), will give readers a good idea of what the study investigates and will bring up the study when others search published dissertations. G. Assumptions and Limitations (3.5, 3.6) States the assumptions (constructs being taken as given, usually four kinds: general methodological assumptions, theoretical assumptions, topic-specific assumptions, and assumptions about instruments or methods) being accepted for the study and the limitations (things the study does not do either intentionally or because of inherent design limitations). H. Definitions of Terms (3.7) Defines all constructs investigated in the study along with characteristics of the sample and any other characteristics or variables which are of importance in the research question. In quantitative projects, define the construct variables operationally. In qualitative projects, all constructs and characteristics need to be clearly and fully described in sufficient detail that readers can observe them in appropriate contexts. I. Expected Findings (3.15) States the findings expected from the data analysis from a conceptual standpoint, showing how the findings are expected to answer the research question in terms of the theoretical framework for the study. Dissertation Chapter Two A. The Introduction to the Literature Review The introduction to the literature review states the overall topic of the dissertation and provides an orienting paragraph or passage so the reader knows what the literature review will address. Describe how the chapter will be organized (what are the main points and in what order do they appear?). Describe (briefly) how the literature was surveyed, providing enough information about search criteria (keywords used, databases searched, libraries accessed and journals investigated, for example) that the reader can evaluate the thoroughness of the review. B. Theoretical Orientation for the Study (2.3) In this section of the literature review, cite the major references to support your theoretical orientation and briefly describe the orientation. Essentially, the "theoretical orientation" or framework is one's "point of view" from which one writes the paper or conducts the dissertation. When you intend to use more than one theoretical framework, you need to synthesize and integrate the different theories carefully. C. Review of Research Literature and Methodological Literature Specific to the Topic or Research Question (2.2, 2.3, 2.4) This section has two sub-sections: Review of research on the topic and Review of methodological literature. How this is organized is important. It can be organized by variables, by factors or constructs to be addressed, by elements of the theoretical framework, by or elements of the research design. D. Synthesis of Research Findings This section will summarize the main points of Chapter Two, showing both the strengths and the weaknesses in your theoretical orientation and your project's relationship with the previous research on the topic, both in content (research findings) and methods (methodology). E. Critique of previous research (2.2, 2.4) In this section examine the quality of the research reviewed. What are the methodological strengths and limitations of the works you reviewed? How do those weaknesses, in particular, affect your own argument? Consider things such a rigor of designs, sampling errors, size of samples, quality or research instruments, appropriateness of statistical procedures, and any other issues related to the quality of research. At the end of this section there should be a strong case for why the study will be a step forward in terms of research rigor. F. Summary This should not be more than a page, and in general will summarize the conclusions you have drawn from the previous literature on your topic or methodology which support your own project. This is of great importance in the dissertation, where this section sums up Chapter Two and provides a transition into Chapter Three. Dissertation Chapter Three A. Purposes of the Study (2.1) This section repeats the information given in the opening sections of Chapter One: the research problem, any background relevant to the methods, the research questions and hypotheses (if any) which are designed to gather information needed to solve the problem, and what the study is meant to accomplish, that is, its purpose. The objective is to reorient the readers so that the methods to be described here will make sense. B. Research Design (3.2, 3.3, 3.4) Describes the research design with emphasis on methods and procedures. Critical elements include methodology, sample type, data collection methods and frequency, and data analysis type(s). Emphasis should be placed on description of validity threats (credibility issues in qualitative designs) and how the design minimizes or eliminates them. Like the previous section, you already outlined this in Chapter One from a conceptual standpoint. Here you can repeat (rewritten, as above) much of that material for the readers’ convenience, adding in greater clarity and detail, with your focus being a concrete description of your design. Again, the aim is to create a step-by-step recipe to support possible replication in the future. C. Target Population and Participant Selection (3.9, 3.11, 3.12) Describes the characteristics of the larger population from which the sample (study participants) will be drawn. Include in this section, after the characteristics, a discussion of sample size, including all steps taken to determine and justify sample size (e.g., power analysis). In this section, you will first describe the characteristics of the population. Next, describe the sample, consistently with the description of the population. Describe the size of your sample next. D. Sampling Procedures (3.9, 3.10, 3.13) Once you have described how you determined the sample size, describe how you plan to select the sample. Include the steps taken for recruitment of participants. Each procedure—identifying potential participants, contacting that pool, recruiting or inviting their participation, and organizing your sample—requires its own procedural description (a recipe clear enough that others can repeat your work). E. Instruments (3.7) Describe in detail all data collection instruments and measures (tests, questionnaires, interview protocols, and so forth). This section should include a description of each instrument or measure, its normative data, validity and reliability statistics, results of field tests conducted to determine validity, reliability, or appropriateness of the instrument. F. Data Collection Procedures (3.14) The procedures section describes the procedures that will be used to carry out all the major methods of the study. As before, the terms “methods” and “procedures” mean different things. “Methods” is a general term describing what you will do to accomplish the task at hand. “Procedures,” on the other hand, are step-by-step descriptions of how the methods will be carried out. The Procedures section should contain at least the following subsections: a) Methods and procedures for sample recruitment, sample selection, and assignment to groups (if relevant); b) Methods and procedures for obtaining informed consent and for protecting the rights and well-being of the participants; c) Methods and procedures adopted to maintain data securely, including the length of time data will be kept and how they will be destroyed; d) Methods and procedures for data collection, including how data will be organized and prepared for analysis; e) Methods and procedures for data analysis; and f) Methods and procedures for presentation of the data, findings, and results. G. Proposed Data Analyses (3.15) Describe carefully the research question and sub-questions, followed by the null and alternate or research hypotheses (in quantitative studies) that predict the answer to each. Whereas Chapter One was conceptual, this section should focus on the empirical and statistical analysis. Describes all methods and all procedures for data analysis including: (a) types of data to be analyzed (see previous sections), (b) organizing raw data, (c) managing and processing data, (d) preparation of data for analysis, (e) actual analyses to be carried out, (f) storage and protection of data. Procedures must be detailed and carefully described. General statements should be avoided. Remember to state not only what statistics will be used, but also to select the level of significance for all significance tests. H. Expected Findings In quantitative studies, describe each outcome of the hypotheses: Was the null accepted or rejected? What correlations were found and at what significance level? In qualitative studies, discuss biases in the researcher that have been identified and how they will be accounted for. The focus in Chapter Three should be on the actual expected results of the analysis (particularly in quantitative studies). I. Ethical Considerations (3.16, 3.17) This section provides a discussion of ethical issues related to the study and the population of interest. Anonymity, confidentiality, privacy, lack of coercion, and informed consent are all issues that should be addressed in this section. Abel, K. (2007). Factors affecting academic interest and self-perception of adolescent Hispanic females. University of North Texas: Proquest. Akers, R. L., & Jensen, G. F. (2007). Social learning theory and the explanation of crime: A guide for the new century. New Brunswick, N.J: Transaction. Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall. Creswell, J. W., & Plano, C. V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. DeLisi, M., & Conis, P. J. (2010). American corrections: Theory, research, policy, and practice. Sudbury, Mass: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (2001). A general theory of crime. Stanford, Calif: Stanford Univ. Press Hagan, F. E. (2011). Introduction to criminology: Theories, methods, and criminal behavior. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. Heppner, P. P., Kivlighan, D. M., & Wampold, B. E. (2008). Research design in counseling. Belmont, CA: Thomson Brooks/Cole. International Rice Research Institute. (1991). Basic procedures for agroeconomic research. Manila, Philippines: International Rice Research Institute. Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Los Angeles: Sage. Miller, G. (2010). Learning the Language of Addiction Counseling. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons. Nofziger, S. (2001). Bullies, fights, and guns: Testing self-control theory with juveniles. New York: LFB Scholarly Publ. Oliver, P. (2003). The student's guide to research ethics. Philadelpha, PA: Open University Press. Rencher, A. C. (2002). Methods of multivariate analysis. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience Siegel, L. J. (2009). Criminology. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. Siegel, L. J., & Welsh, B. (2009). Juvenile delinquency: Theory, practice, and law. Australia: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Silverman, D. (2004). Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice. London: SAGE. Soper, Daniel, S. (PhD). (2011). Statistics calculator. Statistics calculators index. Accessed at State of Washington. (December 2005). Recidivism of Adult Offenders 2004. Sentencing Guidelines Commission. Accessed at < http://www.sgc.wa.gov/PUBS/Recidivism/ Adult_Recidivism_CY04.pdf> Stohr, M. K., Walsh, A., & Hemmens, C. (2009). Corrections: A text/reader. Los Angeles: Sage. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., & Sinagub, J. M. (1996). Focus group interviews in education and psychology. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Walters, G. D. (2002). Criminal belief systems: An integrated-interactive theory of lifestyles. Westport, Conn: Praeger. Williams, M. W. (2010). Self-control theory of crime. New York: Lambert Academic Publishing Read More