Respond to at least one peer who recommended a different qualitative design or paradigm than you did. Describe how your chosen paradigm might or might not be compatible with your colleague’s proposed research design. Evaluate your colleague’s identified ethical issues and suggest any addition concerns his or her design and/or paradigm might generate. Consider the explanation of differences between the quantitative and qualitative research approaches your colleague has provided. Suggest any differences between the two approaches which were not included in your colleague’s initial post. How might these differences affect the interpretation of the findings of the research?
When looking to do a research study, and picking a qualitative design that is most likely to complete with an answer to your hypothesis, a research design must have these basic research characteristics; it is often based on a social constructivism perspective, which explains that human development is socially involved and knowledge is gained based on interactions with others, research problems would equate into research questions with prior research experience, sample sized and how small they might be, how data is collected, including thorough interviews, observations, and data collections, the results of the study is often based on the researchers perspective (Frost, 2011).
Interpretive phenomenological analysis is a qualitative research design that explores how a person views life based on their own lived experiences. I believe this would be an appropriate research design because the additional questions being asked were how a student feels about the interventions, and how they would view this intervention inside and outside the classroom. The answers for this would come from the students based on life experiences. If a student believed that incentives worked because of their experiences of being given incentives and it helping performance, they would likely have a different reaction to the interventions (Ponterotto, 2013).
If an instruction entered into this specific research design, they would assume that some of the participants might have benefited in their past from having been given incentives, so they might think that these participants could show better performance. However, they might also have the assumption that those who have been given incentives before might actually not respond to that type of intervention due to their prior experience with incentives.
I selected the Pretest posttest Control -Group Design for my week 2 discussion. I am not certain if it would change the outcome of the research, except for the addition of personal life experiences with rewards for specific behavior. The differences might be small, but could explain why some participants would respond to the incentives and other might not.
Frost, N. (2011). Qualitative research methods in psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Ponterotto, J. G. (2013). Qualitative research in multicultural psychology: Philosophical underpinnings, popular approaches, and ethical considerations. Qualitative Psychology, 1(S), 19-32. doi:10.1037/2326-3598.1.S.19
2nd Response: Lindsey
The qualitative research design that would best facilitate answering the instructor’s questions would be Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). IPA asks questions about how individuals make sense of their world, seeking insight to the meanings that events and experiences hold for people (Frost, 2011). By utilizing the IPA approach the researcher(s) will be able to gain a variety of perspectives from their participants. The two questions that the researchers are addressing aims to get an idea on how students feel about their involvement in the process. The IPA design attempts to explore personal experience and is concerned with an individual’s personal perception or account of an object or event (Smith & Osborn, 2007). The philosophical paradigm that underlies the recommended approach is Constructivism-Interpretivism. Constructivism-Interpretivism provides a highly interactive researcher-participant relationship that leads to discovered meaning and expression of experience (Ponterotto, 2013). This paradigm is suitable because it relates to the design I have chosen representing a view from the participant, rather than assuming. The past assumptions that the researchers have to set aside when entering into qualitative research study are that quantitative methods are more dominant and that qualitative methods are slowly increasing in popularity (Ponterotto, 2013). Researchers should take notes on what those assumptions may be before the research starts. The differences in the quantitative approach and paradigm is that it relies on collecting data, while the qualitative approach and paradigm explores a more personal account through methods such as interviews, questionnaires or surveys. The qualitative approach that I have chosen best fits the direction that the researchers are going for by gaining more perspective into the purpose of their research.
Frost, N. (2011). Qualitative Research Methods in Psychology. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Smith, J.A. & Osborn, M. (2007) Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis. Retrieved from,
Ponterotto, J. G. (2013). Qualitative Research in Multicultural Psychology: Philosophical Underpinnings, Popular Approaches, and Ethical Considerations. Qualitative Psychology, 1(S), 19-32. doi:10.1037/2326-3598.1.S.19