Choosing a Research Method, Scientific Inquiry:: Complete Process with Qualitative & Quantitative Design Examples

Choosing a Research Method,

Scientific Inquiry

Complete Process with Qualitative

& Quantitative Design Examples

Christian S. Yorgure, PhD

Copyright © 2018 by Christian S. Yorgure, PhD.

Library of Congress Control Number:            2018905982

ISBN:                  Hardcover                            978-1-9845-2809-4

                           Softcover                              978-1-9845-2808-7

                           eBook                                   978-1-9845-2807-0

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Rev. date: 06/30/2018

Xlibris

1-888-795-4274

www.Xlibris.com

779518

Contents

Preface

Abstract

Chapter 1

Introduction

Theorists

What is science?

Theory

What is theory?

Theory construction

Elements of theory and acceptance

Research design and methodologies

Choosing a research method

Types of Research Design

Qualitative research method

Quantitative research

Mixed Method Research

Chapter 2

Literature Review Essay

What is case study research?

What is qualitative research?

Where is case study research utilized?

Case study research design

Strengths and weaknesses

Chapter 3

Case study research utilizing qualitative design

Chapter 4

Case study research utilizing quantitative design

Conclusion

References

List of Figures

Figure 1. Modular unit: Digital media department with six dependent service units.

Figure 2. Nonmodular unit: Sales department with 13 dependent service units.

Figure 3. G*Power calculation for ANCOVA sample size.

To

my family

Preface

Research is designed to respond to a specific inquiry. The researcher establishes the question and selects a suitable research method most likely to produce the best response. The process for choosing the research method is not straightforward; as a matter fact, it involves a great deal of knowledge. Broad knowledge of the various research methods and processes are critical. This book provides the necessary operational understanding of the methods of research.

The primary research design methods in use are qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods of research design. The choice of which method is appropriate depends on the research question(s), the procedure for each method also vary. In addition to the task of selecting a research method to match a set of research requirements, a researcher must stay within the parameters of the design so chosen. These responsibilities can be a challenge. Thus, this book contains specific examples including case study research utilizing qualitative and quantitative models. The overall process is a step by step procedure similar to that of scientific inquiry.

The completion of this book is possible because of the support of dedicated friends who despite their full schedules made time to review/edit sections. I am grateful to Carol Jones-Williams, PhD, MPH, MA, CRC., who reviewed parts of this book. Dr. Marcia Scott-Jones PhD, MPH, MPA, your support spurred me into completing this book. And I have come to rely on Shawn Ryan who edited sections of this book, thank you so much.

I am grateful to my wife who took charge when I was writing this book. To my children who endured my absence from their sports practices, my special appreciation. This section will be incomplete without the mention of my parents (RIP) and siblings whose sacrifices offered me the necessary foundation in life. To my siblings, thank you for your invaluable sacrifices.

Thank you all!

Christian S. Yorgure, PhD

United States

Abstract

Many scholars may find the results from research studies beneficial regarding how these results impact their understanding and knowledge of the subject matter. The scope of their knowledge and the acceptance of research studies are therefore dependent upon several criteria including the reliability, repeatability, and verifiability of the research. For research studies to attain these qualities, research processes must follow specific step by step procedures akin to that of a scientific study. Drawing from several theorists, including Babbie, Creswell, and other science theorists such as Hoover, Shanker, Klemke, and Wallace, I explained the logic in scientific research methods as well as assessed qualitative, quantitative and mixed method research. I also explored the step-by-step procedures in case studies by analyzing annotated bibliography of articles on case study research. The case study research method, known to provide an in-depth understanding of an often very complex subject mostly due to the latitude of the process to evolve with the research, originates from the qualitative research method. Evidence has shown that sound case study research follows a logically sequential process that is necessary for a quality research outcome which is similar to the scientific research approach. The last two chapters in this book contain complete case study research works utilizing qualitative and quantitative research methods.

Chapter 1

Theories of Epistemological Foundations of Scientific Research

Introduction

Acquisition of knowledge is derived from an understanding of the things around us and the world in which we live. This process, however, is a function of several factors including philosophical theories, inquiry, and research methods. The theory of social science research can be a viable tool for exposing ‘what is’ and ‘why it is’ (Babbie, 2012, p. 8). In essence, research can be a predictive tool only if criteria for what is good or bad are defined (Babbie, 2012).

Chapter 1 of this book contains the process of how to acquire knowledge by exploring and examining the theoretical basis for scientific research methods. This is done by assessing logical reasoning behind natural, empirical, social, and the human sciences with a view to evaluating differences and logical limitations—research. The step by step research approach that is necessary for quality research derives from the perspectives of other theorists. In this section, I will show that for research studies to be acceptable, research processes must follow specific step by step procedures that are similar to that of a scientific study. The introduction of qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods of research concludes this section.

Theorists

Logical reasoning, differences, and limitations

An important aspect of seeking and increasing one’s knowledge is based on logic. Logic, according to Shanker (1996) is the study of inferences between formal and informal pairs of relations. For example, such relationship is observed between evidence and hypothesis, reasons and beliefs, or premise and conclusions, and it can also extend to entailments and inductions (p. 9). Logic modeling, abstract laws and relationship around conclusions in mathematical format first began in 1847 by Boole (as cited in Shanker, 1996, pp. 10—11). Boole (1853) examined aspects of the logic in algebraic form and concluded that there was similarity between the symbols of Algebra and those that are capable of being represented in logical forms. Developments in other fields of technology apply commonsense as foundation for building logic.

In dealing with the subject of logical reasoning, I reviewed the works of Shanker (1996). Other research studies on logic modeling adopted symbols of logic drawn from foundational sources. Studies on logic modeling differ from Shanker (1996) to the extent that they emphasize the relevancy of foundational sources. In a broader sense, logic examines conditions where evidence has the tendency to support or not to support conclusions. Therefore, the application of logic can be useful in all areas of endeavor requiring the acquisition of knowledge.

On the other hand, unlike theorists who favor the concept of logical reasoning, there are other theorists such as intuitionists and constructivists who abhor the concept of thought-independence. Intuitionism, which is the difference between the logic of existence and the logic of knowledge, is favored by intuitionists and constructivists who loathe thought-independence. According to Heyting (as cited in Shanker, 1996, p. 93), logic of existence refers to logic of statements about objects whose existence are independent of human thought. Intuitionists and constructivists rather believe that mathematical propositions, for example, express results of some mental constructions. Thus, it is the logic of knowledge, which according to Heyting, that expresses the relationship between mental constructs.

Theoretical basis for scientific research methods

Developments in other fields have expanded the meaning of logic. Shanker (1996) provides a list of current day logic which includes informal logic, probability theory, confirmation theory, decision theory, game theory, and computability and epistemic modeling theories (p. 9). Logic is employed, among others, in generating and testing truths. The process of generating truths about the world forms the basis of science. Knowledge comes in two ways: 1) the agreement reality, that is, by accepting things for what they simply are because others say they are, and 2) through experimental reality that is discovered through observation and testing with empirical support (Babbie, 2012, p. 4).

What is science?

Science provides how agreement and experimental realities become acceptable. Science as a subject matter in this book is based on the views of Hoover, Donovan, Klemke, Hollinger, and Rudge on one hand, and Wallace who included alternative to science as a discipline. The definition of science has many perspectives. However, generally, science is a logical process of investigation that leads to an acceptable knowledge module. It is the procedural approach with criteria for acceptance of inferences backed by both logic and empirical evidence (Babbie, 2012, p. 4). Hoover and Donovan (1991) define science from the perspectives of inquiry formulation and response, stating that it involves rule setting, observation, and verifiable responses (p.3). On the other hand, Klemke, Hollinger, and Rudge (1998) noted that there are no complexities in science. They further stated that the concepts may be quite technical and their expressions simple with relations that enhance deductions (p. 50). Therefore, science is a process that is verifiable.

Verification in science implies that scientific theories are independently confirmable in context and in casual circumstances. Scientific theories must survive scrutiny by competent and disinterested individuals and still found acceptable (Klemke, Hollinger, & Rudge, 1998, p.51). According to Klemke et al., conventional philosophical approach to science considers the equation; all scientists sees through his own eyes and through the eyes of his predecessors and colleagues (p. 51). The process to reaching scientific laws is not an individual endeavor, it is collaborative. Consequently, Klemke et al concludes that science occupies the region of intersection between, sociology, psychology, and intellect (p. 52).

Science and alternatives to science

Knowledge has the inherent imperative to be truthful; therefore, the process of providing knowledge is tasked with credibility. Wallace (1971) explained science as a way of arriving at truth about events and human experiences (p. 11). The alternatives to science must also feature ways of generating and testing truth. According to Wallace, the four ways— authoritarian, mystical, logico-rational, and scientific—of generating and testing truth have differences in how answers are obtained for investigative test questions such as who says so? How do you know? What difference does it make? (Wallace, 1971, p. 11). Each approach maintains a distinctive confidence level in the origin of what needs to be tested. A brief explanation of each approach is given in the following paragraphs.

Authoritarian mode: statement is deemed truthful if those seen to be qualified validate it. According to Wallace (1971), the supernatural and or individuals must be occupants of a social class, and the investigator may solicit the validation by prayer, petition, etiquette, and ceremony. Inclusive in the group are, for example, oracles, elders, archbishops, kings, presidents, professors, and so on.

Mystical mode: the investigative questions are posed to the prophets, medium divines, gods, and the use of other sources that are personal to the investigator. The investigator may solicit answers from the reading of tarot, entrails, hexagrams, and horoscopes (Wallace, 1971, p. 12).

Logico-rationale mode: formal logic is applied to the procedure that produced the statement. Statements are validated if found to have been produced from a logical process.

Scientific mode: generating and testing statements is done by a simultaneous process of observations and the examination of methodology. Wallace (1971) noted that the scientific mode deemphasizes the producer of the statement but rather relies on a collective and replication of the procedures that yielded the items (Wallace, 1971, p. 13).

The emphasis on replication and how conclusions are reached for the scientific approach makes it universally acceptable and enhances harmonious communication among scientists and researchers across geographical boundaries and disciplines because it diminishes the individual bias factor. The scientific approach that focuses on methodology minimizes subjectivity and individual influence on results. It is an objective process compared to its observatory component. This is consistent with the statement of Wallace (1971), who noted that observation introduces biases (p. 15). Hoover and Donovan (1991) corroborates the opinion of Wallace (1971) by stating that developing a systematic approach to answering questions would eliminate tendencies for subjective accounts that are useless to a collective agreement and generalization (p.4). The scientific approach is explored in greater detail in subsequent sections.

Brief overview of elements in the scientific Process

The application of scientific process in generating and investigating truth consists of several elements requiring equitable attention. According to Wallace (1971), theories, hypotheses, observations, empirical generalizations, and decisions to accept or reject hypotheses are the components of a scientific process. Similarly, logic, interpretation, measurement, tests of hypothesis, and concept formation are the transformational processes.

The process of implementing transformational controls on the path to arriving at a conclusion, constitutes scientific methodologies in generating and testing truths. Wallace (1971) noted that while the scientific mode process is standard, the pace, rigor, and the number of cross-functional professionals involved in accomplishing each step may vary markedly thus underscoring the inherent flexibility in scientific methods (p. 19).

Intuition and speculation

Implementing transformational controls involve iterative tests and trials for refinement of hypotheses. However, these iterative trials may breed intuition and speculation in science, Wallace (1971). Intuition lays the foundation for the thought process, initiates the logical process of testing, virtually organizes the experimental design with speculative outcome, and so on. The relevance of intuition, intelligent speculation, and heuristics to science is apparent.

Creswell (2009) elaborated more on the three methods of research. Beginning with the definition of research design, Creswell (2009) offered great insight into respective research methods. Creswell defined research design as the itemized procedure with a step by step detailed process of how a research is conducted. Research design plans and processes involve the selection of suitable method, data collection, and analysis (Creswell, 2009, p. 3). In addition to the elements stated above, Creswell (2009) also pointed out that the decision to use a research design is influenced by factors such as the researchers’ knowledge, interpretation, research problem, and potential consumers of the study. The three types of research designs are introduced in the following sections.

Introduction to Types of Research Designs

The three types of research design are qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. Each of these methods have unique and the not so unique characteristics with areas of similarities (Creswell, 2009, p. 3). The use of words versus numbers, attempt to answer closed-ended questions versus open-ended questions, the method employed in executing each aspect of the research, and the researcher’s philosophical assumptions, are the popular distinguishing characteristics between these designs (Creswell, 2009, pp. 3-4). The following paragraphs contain an overview of each design.

Qualitative research

Qualitative research