Resisting Temptation

You have started your study, but you are not getting many participants. A small little voice in your head suggests that it would be so easy to make up the data… no one would know… When that voice starts whispering to you, hear my voice shouting, "DON'T DO IT!" There are so many ramifications of falsifying data, let us begin with a recent story in the news. Donald Green, a researcher at Columbia University and Michael LaCour, published a study  December 2015 in Science magazine. In the study, Green and LaCour reported results that suggested that voters’ support for same-sex marriage increases following a 20-minute conversation with a gay advocate for same-sex marriage.

Intriguing results are they not? Other researchers attempted to replicate the results. When they were unable to do so, they contacted the original researchers and the journal and wanted to know more about the original data. Green could not produce his data, as more questions were asked; it was found that he lied about funding sources also.

What are the implications of your making up data? You can have your Ph.D. revoked, be dismissed from the university (with no ability to return), if you received any grant funding you could face criminal charges for fraud. In addition, your professional career is finished before you started. You would never be able to use anyone from your institution as a reference, as a result getting a job or entering another program would be difficult to impossible.

Recently IRBs have begun randomly auditing data (particularly collected from students). Falsifying data is not worth it. As a professional, you have a responsibility to be ethical in all aspects of your study. If you are having problems getting enough participants, talk to your committee. If your data is not coming out as expected, talk to your committee. There are ethical solutions, let the experienced researchers guide you to them.

Next time we will consider more aspects of surveys. 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

When to use surveys?

Surveys are popular, because they are efficient; researchers can gather a great deal of information for a small cost and generally in a short amount of time. To consider whether surveys are a good idea for your study consider these issues (from Vogt, Gardner & Haeffele (2012):

1. The data are best of obtained directly from the respondents
2. Your data can be obtained by brief answers to structured questions.
3. You can expect respondents to give you a reliable information.
4. You know how you will use the answers.
5. You can expect inadequate response rate.

Over the next few posts, I will be examining these criteria. Today we will address the first issue whether the data are best obtained directly from the respondents.

Often the only way to obtain information about people is by asking them. This is especially true of subjective data, i.e., the inner states of the subjects being studied, such as attitudes, beliefs, or values. You can also use surveys to collect objective data, such as respondents' age, income, or years of work experience, which could be obtained in other ways, but it is usually easier simply to ask. However, if you have access to records, such as educational and medical records, these may be more accurate and possibly more efficient than asking individuals. People's memories are notoriously poor on such questions, as "how often have you visited your doctor in the past year." Having access to their records would make it much more accurate. Keep in mind that asking unimportant or needless questions tends to annoy participants and they may quit your study because of it.

Next time we will consider resisting temptation. 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

Vogt, W. P., Gardner, D. C., & Haeffele, L. M. (2012). When to use what research design. NY: The Guilford Press.

Research Questions

Last time we considered theories and that they should lead to predictions. Now we take it to the next step and use those predictions to develop research questions. We examined the patient-by-treatment-context interactive model of Christensen and Johnson (2002), and we predicted that it is the primary health provider (PHP) who is the determining factor- so if the PHP was understanding of a patient's nontraditional medical beliefs, it should increase vaccination use.  Now let's develop a research questions based on the prediction.

RQ1: What is the relationship between PHP's support of patients' nontraditional medical beliefs and patients' use of vaccinations?

Do use this research question we would need to have a way to measure "PHP's support of patients' nontraditional medical beliefs" and also a way to measure the patients' beliefs. If you were able to find such measurement tools in the literature, great! You could do a quantitative study measuring PHPs' support, patients' beliefs, and the actual use of vaccinations. But let's say you could not find such measurement tools. You have a couple of choices: 1) develop your own measures or 2) do a qualitative study to examine the opinions of both patients and PHPs. This last choice would require a new research question.

RQ2: What are PHPs' opinions about patients' nontraditional medical beliefs and vaccinations?

RQ3: What are patients with nontraditional medical beliefs opinions about their PHPs and vaccinations?

Let's consider how we went about this process.

Literature review    led to        Theory    led to      Predictions      led to      Research Questions             which led to Research Method

So some things to notice, I did not start with the method, rather I let the theory, predictions, and research questions determine the appropriate method. Next time we will consider when to use various research designs. 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

Putting theories to work

Last time I discussed a method to find relevant theories for your topic of interest and to begin to consider possible predictions from the theory. Let's use an example and think things through using the patient-by-treatment-context interactive model of Christensen and Johnson (2002). The model proposes that the relationship between patient characteristics (e.g., personality and beliefs) and patient adherence (e.g., preventative care) is moderated by the treatment context (e.g., primary health provider characteristics and behavior). I like to draw things out so I get a better understanding of it.

So we can begin tweaking some of the variables and think about how they would be affected in the model. We could consider patients who do not have faith in modern medicine. The model suggests that it is the primary health provider (PHP) who is the determining factor- so if the PHP was understanding of the patient's beliefs, it should increase vaccination use. 

Let's consider how we went about this process so far.

Literature review        to                Theory             to                Predictions

Next time we will take it to the next step of research questions. 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

Christensen, A. J. & Johnson, J. A. (2002). Patient adherence with medical treatment regimens: An interactive approach. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(3), 94-97.

Theory and Research Design

One of the common issues students have when they are beginning to think about doing research is how all of the pieces that are necessary fit together. Do you begin with the research design and try to find a study to fit it? What is the deal with theories, where do they fit into the thinking? There actually is a way to clarify these pieces. Let's start even broader by talking about reviewing the literature. What does that mean? It means finding recent articles on your general topic of interest and beginning to read. Notice what theories the authors discuss when talking about the topic. After you have read 10 articles or so on the topic, stop and evaluate. Are there consistent issues that are mentioned? What theories have been discussed, did the authors make predictions for their study based on the theory? If you are not seeing any predictions or discussions about how the theory is impacted by the new findings- you need to look for a new theory. You need to be able to make predictions based on the theory you will finally use.

So let's say you have narrowed the search down to two theories. Now I want you to go back to the library and find some review articles using those theories. By the time you have read those you should have good understanding of the theory and how it relates to your topic of interest. Think about the variables other researchers have used related to your topic and how the theory predicts things will develop. Next time, I will work through an example of what I discussed today.

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

Do You Feel Like an Imposter?

It is very common for students to feel insecure and that they are simply pretending to be a doctoral student. You may feel that if people really understood how little you know they would not allow you to get a Ph.D.! This feeling actually has a name, the Imposter Syndrome, and it is particularly common in students who are the first in their family to get a doctorate. If you consider it carefully, it makes total sense that you feel this way: you have not known many people socially who have a doctorate and you are, in all likelihood seeing them as smarter than or more creative than you are.

Let us consider if this true. Would you expect a doctoral student to know as much as an accomplished researcher or professor? Of course not, the student is in school to learn. Give the student 20 years and he or she will be as knowledgeable and confident as any other professional is.

You are that doctoral student! You are not expected to know everything at this point. So relax, and take the opportunity to meet other students and doctoral level researchers and get to know them as people. Ask about their families and home lives and you will begin to realize they are similar to other people you know and to you. You have earned your place in your doctoral program; you will gain the necessary experience you need to be successful and graduate!

Want to know more? See Impostor Syndrome Is Definitely a Thing - The Chronicle of Higher Education http://www.chronicle.com/article/Impostor-Syndrome-Is/23841 . . . 

Next time I will begin a series on using theories to determine your research method. 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

Too Close?

There is nothing like the panic a researcher feels when they find a study that appears similar to theirs! What do you do?? First, take a deep breath, rarely is a study going to be identical, so relax. I suggest your next step is to analyze the differences and similarities between yours and theirs (a spreadsheet works great for this).

Compare the population/ sample. How are they similar and different?

Look at their methodology. How are they different? What measures are used?

If you find they are similar, consider tweaking yours to add to the literature (this should always be your goal!). Perhaps adding a different variable or two would tell us more about the issue. If the previous study was quantitative, a qualitative or mixed methods study may provide interesting insights which are not evident in a quantitative study. Keep in mind that a major limitation of surveys is people are limited in their response to the choices given; they may have more to say.

Perhaps you can slightly modify your population to look at the issue in a new way. A hypothetical example might be originally, you wanted to look at diabetes in children and its effect on their schoolwork; your plan was to talk to the students and parents. Let us say you found a very similar study. You could tweak yours and look at the teachers' views of diabetic children in school. How knowledgeable are they about the illness and how do they see it affecting the children's work?

I often suggest students use the similar study as a contrast in their paper. Example: "Smith and Jones (2014) examined children and parents' views of the effect of the child's diabetes on schoolwork. The present study will extend this work by examining the perspective of the teachers of diabetic children."

Next time, we will consider the imposter syndrome. 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