Research_Methods

Research is a vital and essential domain in all parts or psychology as it provides us with rich and useful information which can be used as important information. Research has been defined by Mcleod as ‘a systematic process of critical inquiry leading to valid propositions and conclusions that are communicated to interested others’ (McLeod 1994: 4). It is the research carried out by others which allows us to explore and reflect on certain topics and subjects further more research can be valuable as it can allow us to extend research and explore parts of research that we believe are missing. In addition Cooper (2008) states research is an essential part of being a counselling practitioner as it allows us to evaluate and to refine certain models. Furthermore I believe that research enables us to stick to rules and guidelines. For example Rogers research on the core conditions within counselling gives counselling practitioners a fundamental base for their work and also provides us with guidelines as knowledge of counselling. For the purpose of this essay I will be evaluating research methods as well as writing about my own research intentions. Within research methods exist two major domains including qualitative and quantitative research. Both research styles differ greatly in terms of collecting the data and then analysing the data. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH. Qualitative research as a trend has grown immensely in the last twenty years (Seale et al., 2004). This form of research looks at non numerical data collection that researches experiences rather then facts n figures. Furthermore Denzin (1994) states that qualitative research looks holistically and contextually which prevents this form of research from being reductionist. Qualitative research recognises that in research, patterns may emerge in what participants do or say. Therefore qualitative research involves analyzing and extracting similar meanings and themes from questionnaires, interviews or observations. To gather the data the researcher will use open ended questions with participant and then analyse and code the data. (Seale et al., 2004) Furthermore qualitative researchers may use different approaches when collecting data, These may include grounded theory. Grounded theory is very different to most forms of research as the data is collected first and then the hypothesis is made. As in all qualitative research codes and meanings are extracted from the data, the codes are then grouped in to similar concepts. However, grounded theory has been criticised as it’s believed that doing a literature review before gathering the data can direct the research (Seale, 1999). Furthermore Thomas and James (2006)   also point to the formulaic nature of grounded theory and the lack of congruence of this with open and creative interpretation - which ought to be the hallmark of qualitative inquiry. In addition qualitative research can also be carried out in the form of Phenomenology, which describes the “subjective reality” of an event, as perceived by the study population; it is the study of a phenomenon. (Seale, 1999) However qualitative research has been both critiqued and commended. Seale (1999) describes positivist criteria of qualitative research. The positivist attempt to measure phenomenon based on distinctions between concepts. Therefore positivists have often been sceptical about the usefulness of qualitative research. Rose (1982) describes that the concept of the language used in questionnaires will often exists it and this can hinder the validity of the research. For example if a participant is asked do you often feel lonely' Rose (1982) argues that the success of qualitative research often depends on the language used. For example the word ‘lonely’ will be better received by a participant than the word ‘alienated’. However Denzin (1970) points out the advantages and usefulness of qualitative research and states now lengthy immersion in the field is said to enhance the accuracy of research. In addition to evaluate the usefulness it is also useful to look at the reliability and repliacablity of the research. In a positivist view this is looked at through the language however the positivist view believes that different people have differing views of the world therefore replicating qualitative research is sometimes impossible therefore the reliability of the research is reduced. However the interpretivistists would see qualitative research as useful as they believe that reality is socially constructed. Therefore they believe that the validity and reliability of naturalistic research such as qualitative is much greater than quantitative research. Quantitative research the quantitative approach is seen as objective, that is relating to phenomenon or conditions independent of individual thought and perceptible to all observers, and relying "heavily on statistics and figures"(Jean Lee, 1992),. The basic beliefs of a positivist or quantitative researcher lead them to perceive the world as external and objective, and science as value free. As an observer they are independent and values can be suspended in order to understand. Reality is seen as one and therefore by dividing and studying its parts the whole can be understood. Therefore in their general approach to research design the quantitative researcher is seeking to deduce cause and effect relationships to predict patterns of behaviour. (Kaplan, 2004) Therefore the research purpose is likely to be causal or predictive rather than exploratory. The quantitative researcher then develops theory and uses this to explore the world. This theoretical framework identifies key variables and their relationships and associations. It allows initial design clarity but the result may not necessarily contribute to existing knowledge. (Kaplan, 2004) The stages in data analysis and interpretation are completed after data collection. Statistical measures, such as t tests, anova are used. Quantitative data analysis and interpretation is primarily deductive, a matter of proving or disproving the hypothesis or an assertion developed from a general statement. Indeed in any causal or predictive study when the cause and effect relationship has been demonstrated, or not, then the researcher has done their duty (Westmeyer, 1994; 117). Positivist researchers view quantitative research as a high rigor which makes quantitative data more useful. In comparison qualitative has been criticised as lacking in rigor. In addition quantitative data is deemed as useful as After statistical analysis of the results, a comprehensive answer is reached, and the results can be legitimately discussed and published. Quantitative experiments also filter out external factors, if properly designed, and so the results gained can be seen as real and unbiased. (Mcleod, 2003) Quantitative experiments are useful for testing the results gained by a series of qualitative experiments, leading to a final answer, and a narrowing down of possible directions for follow up research to take. Although quantitative research is useful there are limitations, for example Quantitative research design also tends to generate only proved or unproven results, with there being very little room for grey areas and uncertainty. In addition Mcleod (2003) states that the the significance level or p value has been misinterpreted in past research. However this claim had been disregarded by authors that it shows an amount close or near to significance. In addition Dar et al(1994) state that much of the misuse in statistic in therapy research is flawed as he belives that the statistical test used in quantitative methods do not successfully check whether a prediction or hypothesis has been verified by the results