Quantitative Measures
Quantitative research methods highlight objective measures, numerical and mathematical analysis of information. Data is gathered through surveys, questionnaires, polls, or manipulation of pre-existing records using computational techniques (Brancati 2018). Therefore, the main focus is collecting numerical data and simplifying it for people (Brancati 2018). Also, it aims at determining how one thing relates to the other within a population. There are two designs of quantitative research; experimental and descriptive (Brancati 2018). An experimental study establishes causality, while a descriptive study measures how two-variable associate with each other. For instance, quantitative research helps researchers determine whether a medicine under development will cure a disease by testing it on infected people or a specific animal used in laboratories for testing medicine.
Types of Measures
According to Brancati (2018), quantitative data measurement is done in two ways; discrete and continuous methods. Generally, measurements are continuous data, while counts are discrete (Brancati 2018). When data is discrete, it is in count form, which can be made more specific. For instance, the number of pets in the family is discrete because they can be counted as whole numbers (Brancati 2018). When data is continuous, it can be reduced into finer and finer levels, such as through division. Brancati (2018) further explains that quantitative research measurements are done objectively or impartially. That is researchers have minimum influence over the process of measuring. They just select the type of measurement, apply it then read the results (Brancati 2018). Therefore, the consistency and the accuracy depend on the measure rather than the researcher.
Chapter 16 by Nielsen, L. (2018)
The author Nielsen (2018) was studying whether Joint Physical Custody (JPC) is associated with a positive or negative outcome for children than Sole Physical Custody (SPC). The results in this study reveal that JPC is associates with improved outcomes than SPC for children without considering the parent’s level of conflict or family income (Nielsen, 2018). From the article, we learn that abandoning the cleats, clothing, classwork, or clarinet at the other parent’s house and leaving two sets of rules has not caused a terrible condition for JPC children. However, this can be related to the fact they never leave their commitment to any of their parents (Nielsen, 2018). This does not mean that there is no benefit of having a better relationship with their parents or families with higher income levels or reduced conflicts. According to Nielsen (2018), these factors matter; however, it does not mean that JPC is the most valuable procedure for all children. According to this study, JPC benefits more children than SPC. However, even though the relationship between children and their parents, income, and conflict were equal, there is a higher probability of children benefiting from JPC families.
Mixed Method Research
Recently, there is an increased use of a mixed-method approach when doing research. Scholars prefer using this type of research because it allows them to collect, analyze, and interpret quantitative and qualitative data concurrently (Zohrabi, 2013). The author is the article explored and expounded the advantages and disadvantages of three methods of collecting data. These comprise classroom observations, interviews, and questionnaires (Zohrabi, 2013). By using these instruments of collecting data, researchers can capture both qualitative and quantitative data (Zohrabi, 2013). Additionally, the author argues that any research should improve the reliability and validity of the data. Therefore, these two methods of extending the stability and steadiness of data were explained in detail.
References
Brancati, D. (2018). Social Scientific Research. Sage.
Nielsen, L. (2018). Joint Versus Sole Physical Custody: Children’s Outcomes Independent of Parent-Child Relationships, Income, and Conflict in 60 Studies. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 59(4), 247-281.
Zohrabi, M. (2013). Mixed Method Research: Instruments, Validity, Reliability and Reporting Findings. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 3(2), 254-262.