Theme 4: Quantitative research

1. Which quantitative method or methods are used in the paper? Which are the benefits and limitations of using these methods?
2. What did you learn about quantitative methods from reading the paper?
3. Which are the main methodological problems of the study? How could the use of the quantitative method or methods have been improved?

Journal: The Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health is a journal that covers applied, methodological and theoretical issues. The journal aims to improve epidemiological knowledge on health worldwide.

Article: Possible association between heavy computer users and glaucomatous visual field abnormalities: a cross sectional study in Japanese workers,  M.Tatemici, T.Nakano, K.Tanaka, T.Hayashi, T.Nawa, T.Miyamoto, H.Hiro, M.Sugita, 2004.

 

Foreword: I chose an article of “age” (very young in scientific standards) because I find that the integrity I find in articles dating back a decade or so is generally larger than of today’s articles.

 

The article focuses on the possible relationship between heavy computer use and visual field abnormalities. The question at hand is weather heavy computer users have an increased risk of glaucoma.

 

1.     A number of randomly selected Japanese workers (about 10 000) were tested for visual field abnormalities while also undergoing a medical check up. They also replied to a survey and were interviewed about their computer use. This method was mathematical and analytical.

2.     As I read about how the survey was laid out, the questions involved, I realized this study was well thought out in theory but really lacked conclusive evidence to support this theory in pursuit. In this particular case, the theory was wild and therefore blindly tested through an empiristic study. The study showed some result that was feely subject to interpretation, but not at all clearly, mathematically likely.

What this study in particular takes into consideration is “what are the qualities of the people we are testing?”- not “what are the qualities of people in general”. As empiristic studies usually show, the focus is on something in particular.

3.     This study could have been broader, with subjects from different cultures. As computers in those days were limited (when considering ordinary people) to the “western world” the stress levels of the test subjects were not taken into consideration, for instance. In this particular study, the answers were also sought after to support a theory that had already been established and so I can’t help thinking that maybe the results of this particular study might have been intentionally interpreted in a biased way…

In this case the subjects were a quantity of 10000 people. This might seem like a lot of data leading to an accurate result, however whenever you add to the pot, you upgrade the level of understanding the pot as well. By this I mean the difference between 500 people and 10000 people is that testing the later you have to be preared to also take 200 times more issues into consideration. People are not robots, copied and pasted. They are, in fact, individuals (however manipulated by society they might be).

 

1. Which are the benefits and limitations of using quantitative methods?
2. Which are the benefits and limitations of using qualitative methods?

The paper "Physical Activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection (E.Fondell, Y.Lagerros, C.J.Sundberg, M.Lekander, O.Bälter, K.Rothman, K.Bälter) focuses on the investigation on the relationship between a specific set of health issues ( URTI) and percieved stress leveld and physical activity. The study was carried out by usong quantitative research in the common fashion of sending out a web-based questionnaire to some 1500 people (at the end of the study) in between ages 20-60 years of age. 

 

 

1.     The benefits of quantitative research are a large number of case studies to make the research as objective as possible. Structured techniques for measuring data such as surveys and interviews of randomly selected people. Statistical data gives a mathematically plausible (can’t really ever say that it’s accurate to a full extent) cause or common nominator. The findings are usually conclusive and describes the nature of the outcome.
This is why it's often used as a basis for further investigation, particularly in Medical science.
The drawback is that the data doesn’t take any human error into consideration. No background on the test subject is accounted for nor is any other outcome that might appear. The only thing that is measured is basically what you were looking for in the first place.

2.     The benefits of qualitative research is generating a foundation for possible quantitative research. The number of test subjects might be relatively low, and the findings may not be conclusive at all, but rather serve as a base for future investigation.
Qualitative research digs deeper into the research at hand and establishes points, theories and hypotheses for questions such as "why" ans "how". From there, one can make predictions.

 

research:

[Possible association between heavy computer users and glaucomatous visual field abnormalities: a cross sectional study in Japanese workers,  M.Tatemici, T.Nakano, K.Tanaka, T.Hayashi, T.Nawa, T.Miyamoto, H.Hiro, M.Sugita, 2004.]

[Qualitative vs quantitative research, http://www.snapsurveys.com/qualitative-quantitative-research]

[Thomas, M. (2008), Quantitative data analysis in education – By Paul Connolly. British Journal of Educational Technology]   

[Physical Activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection (E.Fondell, Y.Lagerros, C.J.Sundberg, M.Lekander, O.Bälter, K.Rothman, K.Bälter)]