Survey Analysis And Critical Discussion Of The Findings

In response to the question set, I will go into detail of the study, consisting of the background, main hypotheses, as well the aims, procedure and results gathered from the study; explaining the four research methods chosen to investigate,

The discrepancies identified throughout my literature review may be a result of numerous limitations. These limitations can result from demographic restraints, modality, and sample size. Each of these limitations will be discussed further below.

Starting with the introduction of the survey they seemed to be too specific in their intro of what was going to be in the survey by describing each type of question that would be presented throughout the survey. I feel like this information isn’t necessary and over excessive in an introduction. That part of the introduction should be taken out and instead maybe include something along the lines of “Please read every question carefully and thank you for participating” or something along those lines.

The purpose of this paper is to critique a quantitative study and to present a critical analysis on its research findings. The paper will discuss the elements influencing believability and robustness of research, including writing style, research problem, literature review, conceptual framework, research question, hypothesis, study sample, methods, data analysis and results, and discussion of the relevance and future directions.

Although the amount of research conducted is valid to the nature of the source, it is insufficient for in-depth study purposes. There are no official studies or other valid sources used in this article and a bibliography, naturally, is not provided.

Following the introduction, the authors continue into a review of literature in which the cited sources addressed relevance to the study’s variables. The review of literature consisted mainly of primary and current sources, with no citations preceding the article by five years. It is within this section of the article where the authors chose to further discuss the previous research conducted on the variables and how the variables have

As you stated the authors mention that caution should be utilized when the results are interpreted. The research methods of questionnaires and self-reporting,

I believe that there are several limits to this study. Within a proper random sample we can use research to generalize the findings to most populations. This research only utilized retrospective and cross-sectional methodology; this constrains the generalizablility of the

Both Machi and McEvoy (2012) and Bell and Waters (2014) stated that there are several reasons why the author needs to complete a literature review. The most consequential motives are to compare previous findings, to justify the thesis of this paper, to identify similar work done within the subject area and to critique existing conclusions and suggest further studies. Furthermore the author must gain knowledge and understanding of the most important issues to establish the researcher’s theoretical framework and methodological focus. This literature review will illustration how the investigation the author is conducting fits with what has gone previously and puts it into perspective.

The references are within 10 year limit but the information highly pertains to the study and is still valid. Unlike in a quantitative study, in this qualitative study, the information that is used stand relevant even though the source dates to 1991. The authors made no evaluation or indication to the limitations of the studies that they used for the article. The literature review did include adequate information to build a logical argument. The authors used the literature to back-up their thought process through each section of the

The study was restricted in terms of its choice of literature reviewed. The researcher does not imply in this study that this literature is 100% representative of the US population, so for the purposes of this study, the researcher did not broadly state the results were indicative of the US population

Looking at survey polls, there are various ways we can detect if we should trust these surveys or not. These surveys are portrayed as inductive arguments which mean that the person conducting the surveys is looking to validate his argument, or provide that there is a guarantee of truth in the conclusion. The website conducting the surveys is also trying to prove that their assumptions are correct. However, we cannot simply just believe the data that these polls provide, there has to be something that makes them weak or strong. Taking into consideration the amount of people surveyed, we can determine if a poll is able to represent the target population. Since a survey is an inductive generalization, a sample is taken from the target population

To collect data, semi-structured interviews were conducted on eligible participants. The interviews were audio recorded and analyzed using a constant comparative method. The literature review was not clearly defined in the study, however the purpose statement was mentioned in more than one part in the study (Bhardwaj, Pickard, Carrick-Sen, & Brittain, 2012).

This study relied on qualitative and quantitative data. A study that uses statistical data may be seen as more reliable. Unfortunately, not all statistical evidence is free from error or bias information. A study in which both qualitative and quantitative data is combined, does not guarantee a more reliable study and each of these sets of data have their fair share of weaknesses. Also the study included input from professionals’ perspectives, which increases the chances of bias information. When reading an article journal, one must not deliberate all information as true or false, since newer and updated studies are constantly providing new

The objective of this chapter is to describe the procedures used in the analysis of the data and present the main findings. It also presents the different tests performed to help choose the appropriate model for the study. The chapter concludes by providing thorough statistical interpretation of the findings.