Which quantitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?
What did you learn about quantitative methods from reading the paper?
Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the quantitative method or methods have been improved?
I have chosen the
paper; Social Networking Sites: Their Users and Social Implications - A
Longitudinal Study, which is written by Petter Bae Brandtzæg and published
in the journal; Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2012. This paper
compares different types of social networking sites (SNS)-users and their
social capital, to see if there is any relationship between Social networking
sites and the social capital.
This paper uses a
longitudinal study to collect data from the same participants over a three-year
period (2008-2010). All methods used in the study are quantitative methods.
Three studies have been conducted and the participants have been asked to fill
in a questionnaire. The quantitative methods used were: questionnaire survey
with open questions, questions with set responses and questions with scales.
It was interesting to
read a study that was carried out over a long period. Most of the studies I
have fulfilled at KTH have only been going on for a short period. This paper
gave me an insight into how a quantitative study for a longer time looks like,
and the advantages and disadvantages of this.
This study required
a longer examination because the authors wanted to study changes over time,
which is the advantage with a longitudinal study. The disadvantage of this
study is that because of the time many of the test participants dropped out
during the study period. It was 2000 people from the beginning of 2008, but
only 708 in the last survey, which was made in 2010.
I also think that
many questions in the survey are better suited for a qualitative study. E.g.;
the questionnaire survey consisted of a part where the test participants would
estimate if they felt lonely. Such a question is difficult to answer in a
questionnaire and a 4-point scale. I think it would have been better with an
interview instead.
Another problem
with this quantitative method is the selection of the test participants. All
the 2,000 participants came from the same country, which can have affect on the
final result. The result would have been trustworthier if the test participants
would have come from different countries. However, the range of the
participants was between 15 and 75 years old and the distribution between women
and men was equal.
Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?
Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?
I have read parts
of the study Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory
tract infection. The study discusses whether there is any relationship
between Upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), and physical activity and
perceived stress.
One of the
advantages with quantitative research is that it is easy to reach out to a
large group of people and thus get into a lot of answers in a short time. Also
because the answers often presents in statistics the figures and tables makes
it easy to get a picture of the results and then analyse it. As Table 1, 2, 3
and 4 in Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory
tract infection shows.
Quantitative
methods have of course its disadvantages too. Just like in Social Networking
Sites: Their Users and Social Implications - A Longitudinal-Study as I
mentioned before, there were many non-responses from the initial amount of test
participants in this study too. 5000 people were invited to the study by mail
and of those only 1805 people responded. With a questionnaire is also difficult
to get a deeper understanding of the subject. A
quantitative study can also change a lot and therefore it should be operated
during a longer period. Therefore, a combination of quantitative and
qualitative study is to prefer.
With a qualitative
research you can get longer and more thorough answers to the survey questions.
However this method should be used together with a quantitative research
because fewer and longer responses wont give you the statistic information
needed to draw concrete conclusions.
Hi! You wrote that the collection of data for the study was done over a period of three years. But I'm wondering how it was done exactly during the period? For example in the article we all read by Fondell about URTI, the questionnaire was sent out by e-mail about once a month, over a period of four month. So I'm curious on other types of strategies for the same method and wondering how they did it in your chosen paper.
SvaraRaderaI think the major problem with longitudinal studies is the fact that usually a lot of the participants get lazy or bored and drop out. They don't last very long unfortunately. Like in your article, it went from 2 000 to 708. I wonder if there could be a solution to this because it's quite disappointing.
Hi Ingrid!
SvaraRaderaI agree with you that loneliness is a bit more complex topic than a question of setting points to a 4-point scale. I think that setting points on this topic doesn't put much effort into deep reflection and might be more affected by how you're feeling at that specific time. But I think that it's okay to use to get a more general - even though far from ideal - pattern on how it correlates to social media usage since there is a large amount of users answering the questionaire. But since it's a four-scale system you HAVE to claim that you're either less or more lonely than the normal which may be a bit misrepresenting if you really feel like you're in the middle (even though these problems might be "solved" when summing and taking an average) . But then again, if it would have been a 5-point system people might be more prone to place themselves in the middle than really taking a stance, which is also a problem. It's not an easy task.