Chapter 3: Role of the Researcher (qual, mixed methods)

In qualitative and mixed methods you need to discuss your role as the researcher. Why? Because you are going to be doing the interviews, therefore, who you are and how you know and interact with the participant is essential to understanding the study.

You will want to first define and explain your role as an observer of the behaviors, a participant in the interview, and or an observer-participant. Next, you will discuss any relationships that you have with the participants, particularly if you have a supervisory relation (this will be a big issue for the IRB, so think if there is a way around using your supervisees).

Next, you will discuss how your own biases will be managed. Every researcher comes into a study with biases, if you didn’t have ideas as to what you thought would happen, you would not do the study! You may have been (or are) a member of the population group, how will you keep that from influencing your interview? You will need to be impartial and unbiased, how can you do that? One common way is to approach subjects/ participants neutrally and keep a journal where you relate your feelings that come up for you. It is common for new interviewers to want to engage in a social conversation with the participants and share their own experiences. Do not do this! Your story may influence how they respond to questions; you want to approach the topic as someone new to the topic. Do not assume that you know what they are going to say, let them explain the details.

Finally, you need to think through any other ethical issues, such as, doing a study within one’s own work environment, conflict of interest or power differentials, and justification for use of incentives. Then lay out a plan for addressing any issues that are present.

Next time we will look at Chapter 3: Participant Selection. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 3: Research Design and Rationale (qual, quant, mixed)

This section introduces the research design of your study. Each of the types of design has slightly different requirements for this section.

Quantitative: State your variables, indicate which are independent, dependent, moderating, etc. Then clearly state the type of research design you will be using, an example, might be a 2 (gender) x 3 (age: 20-30, 30-40, 50-60 yrs) repeated measure design. Which means that you will have an equal number of males and females; equal number of people from each of the age groups, and each person will be tested more than once. Relate the design to your research questions.

Discuss how your choice of designs makes sense with what is needed to advance the literature. Perhaps, a great deal is known about the variable, gender and people's age at a single point in time. However, your design allows a look at how things might change over time by testing them at 2 time points.

Qualitative: Begin by restating your research questions (from c. 1). Then you want to describe the main concepts that you will be addressing. Next, you will discuss the research tradition you are using, some examples include phenomenology, case study, narrative, etc. You need to then provide a rationale for using that tradition. Why is one you chose most appropriate for your study? Why not one of the other traditions?

Mixed: This one also begins by restating your research questions (from c. 1). Then you want to describe the main concepts that you will be addressing. You then need to identify how you are using a mixed method and how the data collection and analyses work together. Discuss how this is best approach to answer your research questions, and why you need to use both quantitative and qualitative elements.

Finally, discuss why you have chosen the analysis method you will use and how you will be analyzing the data.

Next time I will discuss the role of the researcher. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 3: Setting (Mixed Method)

Chapter 3 is going to be much trickier to explain than the previous discussions, because each research method has slightly different requirements. I am going to try to address all 3 research methods' sections. I will clearly indicate to which research method it applies.

Today, we will look at the Setting section, which is only included in the Mixed Method checklist. In this section you will describe where you will be collecting the data and why this setting is appropriate and relevant to your study. Describe the aspects of the setting that will affect your study, some examples, are geographical location and the size of the organization, indicate how these aspects will affect your study. Think in terms of replication, if someone wanted to replicate your study, what should they need to know about where you did your study?

Let's use an example, Walden students. Let's say you were going to do a mixed methods study of online students' opinions about variable X, using the Walden participant pool. You would describe Walden as a large online university (you would not give specific names of organizations). You would want to know how many students attend the university and any information you could gather about the participant pool. Then you would want to discuss why Walden is a good choice to examine your topics.

Next time we will look at Chapter 3: Research Design and Rationale. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 2: Summary

The Chapter 2 summary is very important; it should be much more than a quick overview. Think of this section as where the reader can go to understand the key points in the literature in just a few pages. It should provide the reader with a good understanding of the literature. First, summarize the major themes that you found in the literature, the themes will probably be related to your variables. How to do this? Think through: what are the main issues that you found in the chapter? As a writer, I would approach it by reading through the chapter and highlighting the major themes that I find in each subsection. Copy those into the summary and rewrite them so they make a coherent summary.

Second, summarize what is known and not known about your topic. What gaps are missing? Read through the paper again and highlight (in a different color – I love color coding!) everywhere that you found gaps in the literature. Again, copy those and rewrite them into a summary.

Then carefully explain how your study will fill at least one of those gaps. Talk about how your study will extend the knowledge of the topic.

If you have along the way, drawn out a concept; it will make the summary easier for you to write. It will be clearer where the gaps are and how your study will be addressing them.

Next time we will look at Chapter 3: Setting. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 2: Literature Review

We have talked quite a bit about organizing the literature review (see the index for dates of posts), but a few key points to keep in mind. Do an outline! Start broad- what is the broadest topic that applies to the study? So for example if you are interested in the elderly's opinions of their physician – the broadest area is aging- start there and narrow it as you go.

Keep in mind that you are to synthesize the literature, meaning you are not making a list of the studies have been done. Instead, you are looking for commonalities between the studies. One way to think about this is that you are writing about the topic, using previous studies to support your arguments. Thus, if you are writing about a specific variable, let's say resilience, you will want to look at how others have examined the topic, the populations they have used, and what the results were. Let's use an example from my oldest old and physician paper (Stadtlander et al. 2013), here is the section on resilience:

Resilience moderates the negative effects of stress and promotes adaptation (Wagnild, 2009; Wagnild & Young, 1993), and is described as an enduring personality characteristic (Foster, 1997).  Nygren et al. (2005) suggested that the development of resilience constitutes a form of compensation for losses of functional capacity and physical health. Leppert, Gunzelmann, Schumacher, Strauss, and Brahler (2005) reported that higher scores on the resilience scale correlated with lower rates of subjective complaints, and has been associated with health-promoting behaviors (Wagnild, 2000).  Higher resilience has been found to be correlated with higher self-efficacy (Caltabiano & Caltabiano, 2006); it has also been found to be correlated with LOC in women with traumatic experiences (Friedman, 2009), but this relationship has not been previously examined using the Wagnild and Young scale in the oldest old [as in the current study].

There are a number of techniques used in this paragraph – in yellow highlight are ones in which other research has been used to support arguments. In blue highlight are where other researchers' conclusions are brought in. Green highlights are where the results from previous studies are given. Finally, pink highlight is where the current study is tied to previous work.

In your paper, you will go into more detail, but the same techniques may be used. Remember, that you want to put your study into the context of the literature, so keep relating it back to your study.

Next time we will look at Chapter 2: Summary. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Stadtlander, L., Giles, M., Sickel, A., Brooks, E., Brown, C., Cormell, M., Ewing, L., Hart, D., Koons, D., Olson, C., Parker, P., Semenova, V., & Stoneking, S. (2013). Independent Living Oldest-Old and Their Primary Health Provider: A Mixed Method Examination of the Influence of Patient Personality Characteristics. Journal of Applied Gerontology. Advanced online publication. doi:  10.1177/0733464813482182

Chapter 2: Theories and Conceptual Framework

In Chapter 2, you will be expanding on the theories you mentioned in Chapter 1. This is where you go into the background of the theory, where did it come from and why was it developed? Talk about the major ideas of the theory, and go into some depth on how the theory has been applied in studies similar to yours (giving citations of course). Then you will want to discuss why you are using this theory as opposed to other ones. Finally, you will want to go into some detail as to how the theory relates to your study and to your research questions. What does the theory predict will happen in your study? Yes, you can have multiple theories, they should each offer different insights in your problem and each needs to be discussed. You will also want to compare and contrast the different theories' predictions.

You may also wish to discuss the conceptual framework of your study. A conceptual framework is a less developed form of a theory and consists of statements that link abstract concepts, in psychology it is often described by the term "model." You can build your own conceptual model by thinking through how you think your variables are related to the main concept. Draw a picture of how you think the relationship works. Then think through what aspects you will be examining in your study. If you want to address this area in your paper, you will need to discuss other key theorists and researchers who have done related studies and how their results fit into your conceptual ideas. You will also want to discuss how the concept has been used previously in research; keeping in mind other researchers may only have examined a portion of the model.

Next time we will examine the literature review. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 2: Literature Search Strategy

The next section in chapter 2 is the literature search strategy. This section will go easily if you kept track of all of your literature searches in your research journal. If not, you may need to rerun them.

You need to walk your reader through how and where you did your literature search; you are demonstrating the thoroughness of your scholarship. List the databases you searched, they should go beyond the psychology ones, include academic search premier, Thoreau, perhaps education and medical ones, dissertations, and Google scholar. List the search terms that you used, and the combinations of keywords that you used.

One of the most common questions I get is how to do literature searches. A brief review: You need to think about both breadth and depth in your searches. Let's do an example together, let's say we are interested in the elderly and resilience. Some words to start with would be elderly, seniors, older adult, I would also try young-old, middle-old, and oldest old (these are terms you see in the literature). I would combine each of these with resilience. When I find relevant articles, I will check out their keywords and add those into my combinations.

If you have difficulty finding appropriate literature and terms, please talk to the Walden librarians. They are a wonderful resource and will give you all kinds of ideas that you have not considered. Keep track in your research journal: everyone you talk to, all literature searches, and everything you do related to your project.

Next time we will examine Chapter 2: Theories and Conceptual Framework. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 2: Intro

The chapter 2 introduction sets the stage for your literature review. There are 3 main topics that need to be discussed in this section. 1) Restate the problem and purpose of the study; this should be a brief summary of these areas. You are putting the chapter into the context of your study for the reader.

2) Provide a concise synopsis of the current literature that establishes the relevance of the problem. The keyword here is concise. You are showing why your study is needed. So discuss very briefly the gap in the literature and how your study will address the gap. Yes, this is very similar info that you are asked to provide in chapter 1, but resist the impulse to simply copy things. Restate it in your own words; be sure to include relevant citation to support your arguments

3) Finally, preview the major sections of the chapter. Give your reader a picture of where you are going in the literature review.

By the end of the introductory section, your reader should understand why you are doing your study, why your specific study is needed, and where you are going in the literature review. I suggest you write this section after you have written the rest of your chapter, it will be much easier to describe where you are going after you have been there!

Next time we will examine literature searches. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 1: Summary

Students often treat the chapter 1 summary as a last minute add on- however, it is important in its own right. In the summary, you should briefly review the main points from your chapter and talk about what will be discussed in future chapters. Why do you have to do chapter summaries? The dissertation should not be looked on as a "paper," instead, it really is a book that you are writing. Just as a textbook has summaries at the end of each chapter and a preview of the next one to keep the reader interested, so should your dissertation.

You need to keep your reader in the back of your mind, picture a future student, similar to you, who is trying to find out about your topic area and your study. Write clearly for him or her, explain your terms, your goal is not to impress them with your academic language- it is to educate them. Occasionally ask yourself, what is my future reader going to want to know? Have I explained it clearly? Let them be impressed with the clarity of your writing and your enthusiasm for the topic.

Next time we will examine Chapter 2: Intro. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 1: Nature of the Study

A section of Chapter 1 that students are often asked to revise is the one on the nature of the study. This section can be thought of as an overview of your project. It begins with a rationale for selecting the design or tradition that you will use; questions to ask yourself are: why is this the best method to use to answer my research question? Why are other methods not appropriate?

You will then need to summarize your research methods. Go into some detail here, how will you recruit your participants? How many people will participate? In general, what will happen to them in your study? How will you analyze the data that you collect?

Keep in mind, that I recommend you write chapters 2 and 3 first, but if you do not you will have not written chapter 3 at this point, so it can be a difficult section to write. I suggest thinking of this section as a placeholder- put in what you think you will do and plan to revise after you have written chapter 3. This section should force you to begin thinking through your study, remember chapter 3 should be in enough detail that someone could replicate your study based on the description. Therefore, this is a good place to begin considering the details. You should try to imagine how each step will work: How will you recruit? Will you use a flyer or ad? What it will say and look like? Where will it be posted? What will people who wish to participate do, in order to be included in the study? What happens then? How will you get their consent to participate? Every detail will need to considered and addressed in chapter 3, so begin now to work through them.

Next time we look at the Chapter 1 summary. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Fear of Mistakes

Have you ever sat frozen at your computer, afraid that your writing won’t be good enough? I recently visited the Library of Congress in DC and saw this document:

This is an early draft of the Declaration of Independence, one of the most important documents in the US. Several things occurred to me with this.
1) Even the best writers in history had to make revisions
2) Perhaps there is a link between amount of revisions and quality of the final document?
3) That I am so appreciative of computers, and the ease of revisions now! Imagine writing such a paper by hand and having to start over with the slightest error.

Next time we will look at the nature of the study section in your paper. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Chapter 1: Definitions

Part of Chapter 1 is a section on definitions; you would think this would be simple wouldn't you? However, even this section has some rules you need to know. First, every definition needs a citation. Do not use Wikipedia for your source. Second, you should not use the word that you are defining in its definition ("Older adult: an older adult is…"). Third, your definitions need to be in alphabetical order.

Which words should you define? Any words or terms that are jargon and may not be known to the average reader. Do not include statistical tests or theories here. This section is where you would define terms related to your population that may have multiple meanings ("older adult," "young adult," "baby boomer"). Terms you are using in a specific way should be listed here ("online education," "synchronous learning," "homelessness," domestic violence," "faculty mentor").

Do not define acronyms here- that should be done in the text, the first time it is used. An example: "The lexical decision task (LDT)…" Per APA 4.21, remember to italicize key terms on first usage, often this will occur in the definition section.

Next time we will look at the nature of the study section in your paper. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Theoretical Foundation vs. Conceptual Framework

What is the difference between a theoretical foundation and a conceptual framework? A theory is usually found in the scholarly literature and has been formalized and tested by other researchers, it should explain relationships between variables. Theories are often multilayered and complex. A conceptual framework is a less developed form of a theory and consists of statements that link abstract concepts, in psychology it is often described by the term "model." Here is a great example I ran across in Wu, Viswanathan, and Ivy (2012).

This is a way to lay out your variables and how you think they interact, as opposed to a theory, which is more refined and has had aspects that have often been previously tested.

If you would like more info on conceptual frameworks, take a look at Ravitch and Riggen's (2012) book Reason & Rigor: How Conceptual Frameworks Guide Research.

Next time we will look at definitions in your paper. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! Send me an email with your ideas. leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Wu, J. M., Viswanathan, M., & Ivy, J. S. (2012). A conceptual framework for future research on mode of delivery. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 16(7), 1447-1454. doi:10.1007/s10995-011-0910-x

Chapter 1: Intro

I have been spending a lot of time with students recently working on Chapter 1, so I thought it might be worth discussing it some. I think it helps to think of this first chapter of your proposal as an introduction to your study. It is not a continuation of your abstract- so you need to repeat info given in the abstract.

The introduction to chapter 1 is one of the most important parts of your entire paper. This is where you grab your reader's attention and provide a map of where you are going. You need to explain very concisely the need for your study (the gap you are addressing). This is where you might want to include a few statistics showing the size and concern of the problem. Give enough background literature to put the study into context, and explain briefly what method you will use. By the end of the introduction, your reader should understand  what the gap is, how you will do it, and why your study is needed to fill the gap that you have mentioned.

It is a difficult section to write, because it all needs to be around two pages. The language needs to be clear, without jargon, and to the point. Don't write in "academic" language; at least initially, write to your grandmother, explaining it in normal language. If you must use any terms that might not be known to your grandmother, define them. Avoid using acronyms if you can, I hate having to have a cheat sheet to translate a lot of abbreviations.

Have some friends or family members read the section and ask them questions about it. Why am I doing the study? How am I doing it? Do you get the feeling that my study is needed?

Next time we will look at theoretical foundation vs. conceptual framework in your paper. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! Send me an email with your ideas. leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Baby Steps

Today I want to remind you of the importance of doing even a small amount on your dissertation project each day. Reading an article, writing a paragraph, writing in your research journal all count. Even the smallest baby steps will help you to move forward.

Think of it as there are thousands of steps necessary to complete a dissertation, take one more of those steps today, and get that much closer to the finish line

Next time I will start a series going through the dissertation chapter by chapter. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Send me an email with your ideas. leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Accountability

It is easy to blame others when things go wrong, isn’t it? Your chair is compulsive about APA…. The URR is mean and impossible to please. However, today I want to remind you how important it is to be accountable for your own actions in general. Part of being a professional is recognizing that you make your own choices, and ultimately there really is no one else to blame. Accepting your own responsibility that contributed to a problem is part of your growth. No one expects you to be perfect, it is ok to say that you messed up and you will try to correct it.

Let me give you some examples. If you are having many problems with a committee member, first accept that this person on your committee. Second, perhaps there are communication issues and you each are not expressing yourself clearly. Try other forms of communication such as the phone. Third, if this doesn't work, you must accept that it is your responsibility to do something about the situation. Contact your coordinator or program director and lay out the issues as neutrally as possible. Admit that you are probably equally responsible for the problems, but you would like some help in resolving it.

Why should you take responsibility? First, it shows maturity and professionalism to understand that both parties contributed to a problem. Second, when students start playing the blame game, whining, and complaining, it comes across as the student is probably the real source of the issue- is that what you want?

An illustration:

Dr. Stadtlander,

I need your help! My URR is being totally unreasonable, she wants me to rewrite my paper again for the third time. I have so much going on in my life, I simply do not have the time to respond to her OCD problems. Please how can I rid of her??

Compare the above to this one:

Dr. Stadtlander,

I need some advice, please. My proposal has been rejected by the URR now for the third time. I accept that my writing is at issue; however, I am not sure how best to resolve the problem. I have spoken to my chair and he acknowledges there are still issues in the paper but is not sure how I can best address them. Do you have any suggestions?

The second student is obviously open to suggestions and will be willing follow through with them. The first one does not come across as recognizing that he/she could be part of the problem and will probably fight any suggestions I make.

Finally, I want to remind you that being accountable gives you back control. When you recognize that you are part of the problem you can then become part of the solution.

Next time we will look at baby steps. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Send me an email with your ideas. leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Getting Feedback

From Paula: I do not understand why on this level (Ph.D.) – you do not get any feedback about the content of your paper. I am very passionate about my dissertation topic, but no faculty member/committee member ever commented on the subject. For me this was/is weird. I do not advocate for more feedback, but it would help to know this in advance and to understand the reasons for it.

Interesting issue, Paula, I had to stop and think about it for a while. I think there are a number of factors involved. First, unless you just happen to have a chair or committee member very knowledgeable about the topic (I have only a couple that I can think of), the faculty may not know a great deal about the subject. This means that their comments will tend to be related to the logic of the arguments you make and if you appear to have covered the necessary literature.

A second factor is that there is an underlying assumption that you are an expert in the area you are addressing. As a committee member, even if I know something about the topic, in all likelihood I have not gone into a great deal of detail in the literature of your specific subtopic. As someone reading the paper, I will look for the student's understanding of the areas that I do know. I will also look at the type of references used – are they primarily books or textbooks? This shows the student has not dug deep enough into the literature.

A third comment, I know for me (and probably most faculty) I tend to be a generalist in my knowledge, I seem to know a little about many topics and a great deal about some narrow ones. After teaching many different psychology courses over the last 25 years (icky to realize that!), I have learned quite a bit about most areas of psychology. This means I can generally judge if the content seems adequate or if the student has misunderstood something important. Also, I find most faculty will ask questions of the student in the paper rather than make comments on what is written- the idea is to make you think it through not provide the answers.

A final observation, in general I think what I look for in content is a logical argument. If you think back to the posts, where I discussed writing from broad subjects to narrowing it to the subtopics, this makes sense. An example, if John sends me a draft of his proposal, examining the elderly's opinion of their medical care, there are certain content areas I expect to be addressed. He should discuss aging in general, aging and medical care, patient satisfaction, etc. I want to be educated on the topic/ subtopics, if I don’t feel like I really understand the rationale, there is something missing in content.

Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Send me an email with your ideas. leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Next time we will look at being accountable for your actions. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Send me an email with your ideas. leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Courage and the dissertation

In honor of the 4^th of July, I would like to talk about courage. One does not generally think of this word when considering dissertations, however, it is an integral part of the process. It took great courage for you to decide to move from the path you were on, to that of a doctoral program. You may have left on the old path, friends and even family members who did not understand your new direction. That can be painful and lead to second thoughts. You left comfort and went into the unknown, an exciting but also frightening decision.

You have probably questioned that decision many times, wondering if you are "good enough" to finish. While this is normal, it is also takes courage to face your deepest fears and continue. Along the way, you have you have had your writing (and maybe your ideas) criticized and had to rewrite, yet you have bravely continued. Today, reflect on your courage and the example you are to others. Because of your example, your children, grandchildren, friends, and people you do not even know may find the courage to face the unknown in order to find a better future. Today, celebrate courage and independence. You have earned it!

Next time, we will consider getting feedback.  Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Would you like to be a guest writer? Send me your ideas! leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Acceptance

You will find that instances may occur during your dissertation when you too must accept some difficult news. Common ones for students are that a committee member wants more revisions or you must take an additional quarter to finish, even if it means paying out of pocket. Fighting such things, kicking and screaming, simply does not change the inevitable. You must accept there are times when you must put up with delays.

The feeling of a lack of control can be frustrating, painful, and make you angry or depressed. It can stop you in your tracks and make you throw things at the computer. It doesn’t help. The sooner you can accept that this too is a part of life and the process of getting a doctoral degree, the sooner you can move forward. Take it one step at a time and claim what control that you can. What step can you do today? Even if it is nothing more than making a list, take the next baby step toward acceptance.

Next time, we will consider getting feedback. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Send me an email with your ideas. leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Tables and Figures

Recently a student asked me "how many tables and figures should I have in my dissertation?" This is another of those tough questions for which it is hard to provide a firm rule. The APA manual states that you should "limit the content of your tables to essential materials" (section 5.07). This means you should only include information that is cumbersome or confusing if written in text. A couple of examples are demographics and correlation tables, which are often clearer in table format than explained in text. Below is an example of a demographics table from a dissertation (Clark, 2013).

Table 1. Summary of Demographics

Demographics

Participants	Gender	Age	Time attending community college
Participant 1	Female	62	3 years
Participant 2	Female	57	1 online class
Participant 3	Female	55	4 classes
Participant 4	Female	54	2 years
Participant 5	Male	50	2.5 years
Participant 6	Female	52	3 years
Participant 7	Male	51	1 year
Participant 8	Female	59	4 years
Participant 9	Female	59	3 years
Participant10	Female	62	7 years
Participant11	Male	58	2 years

Note. The mean age of the participants was 56.2 years.

What about figures (graphs)? These should be used very sparingly. The only time I recommend the use of a figure is for a quantitative study that had an interaction effect, it is typically easier to understand if presented in a graph. Here is an example from Stadtlander, Giles and Sickel (2013, p.128).

As shown in Figure 1, there was an interaction effect (F [1, 14] = 13.25, p < .01), whereby the lab group showed a greater knowledge gain over the four periods as compared to the comparison group.

Figure 1: Research Knowledge Test Scores Interaction Effect for Lab and Comparison Students

Next time I will examine acceptance. Do you have an issue or a question that you would like me to discuss in a future post? Send me an email with your ideas. leann.stadtlander@waldenu.edu

Clark, L. (2013). Older Adult Community College Students' Perceptions of Readiness for Learning Online. Walden University Doctoral Dissertation.

Stadtlander, L., Giles, M. & Sickel, A. (2013).  The Virtual Research Lab: Research Outcomes Expectations, Research Knowledge, and the Graduate Student Experience. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 3(1), 120-138.