Author Question: As Denzin claimed, there is an advantage to performing mixed methods or triangulated research. In ... (Read 42 times)

Alainaaa8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 576
As Denzin claimed, there is an advantage to performing mixed methods or triangulated research.
 
  In a study of pain and fatigue control after hip replacement, what would the primary advantage be of conducting both a quantitative descriptive portion and a grounded theory portion?
  a. The results would be more difficult to understand, but more scholarly.
  b. It would force a multiple-authorship arrangement, assisting each scholar.
  c. Bias would decrease.
  d. The time required to complete the study would be approximately double that of completing one that utilized only one method.

Question 2

A researcher tests the effect of a new laparoscopic treatment for chronic shoulder dislocation.
 
  The results are statistically significant, and the researcher states in his findings that there is evidence that the treatment has promise for widespread application. A subsequent replication study fails to show statistical significance. A third study produces the same effects as the second. What is the most likely explanation here?
  a. Type I error occurred in the first study.
  b. Type II error occurred in the second and third studies.
  c. Random error produced insufficient power.
  d. Bias was introduced by replicating the study.



AngeliqueG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 343
Answer to Question 1

ANS: C
Denzin (1989) believed that combining multiple theories, methods, observers, and data sources can assist researchers in overcoming the intrinsic bias that comes from single-theory, single-methods, and single-observer studies. Triangulation evolved to include using multiple data collection and analysis methods, multiple data sources, multiple analysts, and multiple theories or perspectives. The concept of triangulation is now commonly replaced with the idea of mixed methods approaches

Answer to Question 2

ANS: A
A serious concern in research is incorrectly concluding that a relationship or difference exists when it does not (type I error, rejecting a true null). If only one of three studies supported the new treatment, it is most likely that a type I error occurred in the first study. Low statistical power increases the probability of concluding that there is no significant difference between samples when actually there is a difference (Type II error, failing to reject a false null). A type II error is most likely to occur when the sample size is small ro when the power of the statistical test to determine differences is low. Random error has no effect on power. Replication of research identifies areas of bias; it does not introduce bias.



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question
 

Did you know?

In inpatient settings, adverse drug events account for an estimated one in three of all hospital adverse events. They affect approximately 2 million hospital stays every year, and prolong hospital stays by between one and five days.

Did you know?

Hip fractures are the most serious consequences of osteoporosis. The incidence of hip fractures increases with each decade among patients in their 60s to patients in their 90s for both women and men of all populations. Men and women older than 80 years of age show the highest incidence of hip fractures.

Did you know?

About 3.2 billion people, nearly half the world population, are at risk for malaria. In 2015, there are about 214 million malaria cases and an estimated 438,000 malaria deaths.

Did you know?

Cancer has been around as long as humankind, but only in the second half of the twentieth century did the number of cancer cases explode.

Did you know?

Dogs have been used in studies to detect various cancers in human subjects. They have been trained to sniff breath samples from humans that were collected by having them breathe into special tubes. These people included 55 lung cancer patients, 31 breast cancer patients, and 83 cancer-free patients. The dogs detected 54 of the 55 lung cancer patients as having cancer, detected 28 of the 31 breast cancer patients, and gave only three false-positive results (detecting cancer in people who didn't have it).

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library