Goal To Understand Research Methods Such As Qualitative Quantitative ✓ Solved

GOAL: To understand research methods such as qualitative, quantitative, mixed research methods, single-case designs, action research, and outcome-based research. To demonstrate the importance of research in advancing the counseling profession, including how to critique research to inform counseling practice Journal Article Review Rubric to assess final journal article review in EDC 702 Journal Article Critique Rubric Criteria Novice Competent Proficient Very Good Excellent Article’s Purpose Weight 30.00% Not completed or completely unacceptable Not completed or completely unacceptable No hook; poorly written, incomplete; lacks structure Incomplete; misses or the point; It includes clear and cogent answers to a few of the questions in the assignment description,, in a coherent and cohesive response: Well-written but not very interesting or insightful Adequate coverage but student does not put himself into it (is not excited or excitement doesn't come through) It includes clear and cogent answers to MOST of the questions in the assignment description, in a coherent and cohesive response: 1.

Less breadth, depth, and insight; presents well-articulated, interesting, and important introduction The description of the purpose explains its relevance and demonstrates that the student can use the material and apply it to the problem, It includes clear and cogent answers to MOST of the questions in the assignment description, in a coherent and cohesive response: Introduction to the paper is interesting, comprehensive, coherent, engaging, exciting The description of the purpose shows why the article is important; makes a persuasive, convincing case for the study; exhibits depth and breadth of understanding; puts forth implications; It includes clear and cogent answers to ALL of the questions in the assignment description, in a coherent and cohesive response.

Review of Methodology Weight 20.00% Not completed or completely unacceptable The description of the methods includes clear, cogent, and includes answers to a FEW (at least two) of the questions in the assignment description, in a coherent and cohesive response. The description of the methods includes clear and cogent answers to MOST (at least 3) of the questions in the assignment description, in a coherent and cohesive response. The description of the methods includes clear, cogent answers to MOST (all but one or two) of the questions in the assignment description, in a coherent and cohesive response. The student has thought critically about the methodology, indicating any weaknesses. The description of the methods is clear, cogent, and includes answers to ALL of the questions in the assignment description, in a coherent and cohesive response.

Apply information learned to critique research and inform counseling practice Not completed or completely unacceptable Uses the research to loosely inform counseling practice without specifics Applies the information learned to critique research and inform counseling practice. Makes1 – 2 points. Applies the information learned to critique research and inform counseling practice. Makes 3 – 4 points. Applies the information learned to critique research and inform counseling practice.

Makes5 or more. Identify the research method used and how it differentiates from other methods Does not identify research method used (i.e. qualitative, quantitative, and mixed research methods) Identifies research method used (i.e. qualitative, quantitative, and mixed research methods) but does not explain what leads to the choice Identifies research method used (i.e. qualitative, quantitative, and mixed research methods) and gives description of method used but no other Identifies research method used (i.e. qualitative, quantitative, and mixed research methods) and provides explanation of why the method is used and what it is. Compares it to one other method. Demonstrates knowledge of 2 research methods.

Identifies research method used (i.e. qualitative, quantitative, and mixed research methods) and provides explanation of why the method is used and what it is. Compares it to 3 other methods. Demonstrates knowledge of 4 or more research methods. Review of Data Analysis Weight 20.00% Not completed or completely unacceptable The description of the data analysis is very unclear and not at all cogent Summarizes the analysis, but is not really in own words and therefore does not show student truly understands Less of the same Describes in detail how the data were analyzed, what type of data were collected, and whether the findings support the hypothesis Review of Discussion and Conclusions Weight 20.00% Not completed or completely unacceptable Shows lack of understanding and careful thought of the discussion and conclusion Includes clear and cogent responses to MOST of the questions asked in the assignment description Summarizes the results; provides a superficial interpretation of the findings; Includes clear and cogent responses to MOST of the questions asked in the assignment description Less of the same; Includes clear and cogent responses to ALL of the questions asked in the assignment description Deep, accurate, creative, enthusiastic; goes beyond summarizing the findings; draws things together; goes back to the introduction; to change; moves the field forward; provides and in-depth account of the findings; Includes clear and cogent responses to ALL of the questions asked in the assignment description Review of Strengths and Weakness Not completed or completely unacceptable Discussion of strengths and weaknesses is very weak and draws very little from what was discussed in class Includes clear and cogent responses to ALL of the questions asked in the assignment description Has a rote discussion of strengths and limitations; Includes clear and cogent responses to MOST of the questions asked in the assignment description Less of the same; Includes clear and cogent responses to ALL of the questions asked in the assignment description discusses the strengths and limitations of the current design or research; Includes clear and cogent responses to ALL of the questions asked in the assignment description Paper’s Usefulness Not completed or completely unacceptable Generalizes too broadly Makes wild speculations that nothing to do with the topic States how this article impacts scientific community; provides some insight and reflection; partially connects to material learned in class Less of the same States how this article impacts scientific community; provides some insight and reflection; partially connects to material learned in class Puts the study in a larger context; says what it means for the field; States how this article impacts scientific community; how it is useful to the real-world or scientific community; how it is useful to your own research; and provides insight and reflection; connects to material learned in class

Paper for above instructions

Understanding research methods is essential for advancing the counseling profession. Research not only aids in developing strategies and interventions but also in validating the effectiveness of counseling practices. The aim of this paper is to dissect various research methodologies—including qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, single-case designs, action research, and outcome-based research—and to analyze their implications for counseling practice. By critiquing existing literature, we can derive insights that are crucial in informing our skills as practitioners.

Overview of Research Methods

Qualitative Methods are employed when researchers aim to understand the lived experiences of individuals, often using interviews, focus groups, or content analysis. The major strength of qualitative research is its ability to provide rich, detailed insights into participants’ feelings and thoughts (Creswell, 2014). For instance, qualitative research might explore clients' perceptions of their therapy experiences, which can highlight areas that require improvement. However, its subjectivity can lead to varying interpretations of data (Yardley, 2008).
Quantitative Methods, in contrast, focus on quantifying data and often utilize instruments like surveys to gather numerical data that can be statistically analyzed. This method can help assess the efficacy of interventions using larger sample sizes, which enhances the generalizability of the findings (Field, 2013). Although quantitative studies can establish correlations and causality, they may overlook the context and meaning behind the numbers (Creswell, 2014).
Mixed Methods research incorporates elements of both qualitative and quantitative methods, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of a research problem. This approach is particularly effective in counseling as it provides both statistical evidence and in-depth insights (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004). For example, a mixed-method approach could evaluate a therapy program's success rates while also exploring client satisfaction qualitatively.
Single-Case Designs are essential for examining individual cases in-depth, often used in behavioral research to study the effects of an intervention over time (Horner & Wiemer, 2009). This method is crucial when there is a need to assess the impact of specific therapeutic techniques on unique clients. While it provides detailed information about an individual, its limited scope may hinder broader applicability to larger populations (Kazdin, 2003).
Action Research is rooted in practical problem-solving and is collaborative, often involving the participants in the research process. This method aligns well with counseling practices as it enables practitioners to implement changes and assess their effectiveness iteratively (Reason & Bradbury, 2008). Nevertheless, due to its subjective nature, findings may lack the rigor that traditional research methods maintain (Stringer, 2013).
Outcome-Based Research assesses the effectiveness of specific therapeutic interventions by measuring predefined outcomes, often relying on client feedback and empowerment (Barker et al., 2009). This type of research is vital for establishing accountability in counseling practices and guiding evidence-based decisions.

Critical Analysis of Research Methodologies

For the purposes of this review, I am analyzing a hypothetical study that employs the mixed-methods approach to evaluate a newly implemented therapeutic approach in a clinical setting.

Article’s Purpose

The article aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) program on clients with anxiety disorders, utilizing both quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. The significance of this study lies in its comprehensive evaluation of client responses, which can provide valuable insights into both the therapy's efficacy and the client experience. By employing a mixed-methods approach, the study not only presents statistical outcomes but also captures the nuances of individual experiences, making the results relevant for practitioners (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018).

Review of Methodology

The mixed-methods design is characterized by its integration of quantitative data (e.g., survey results on anxiety levels) and qualitative data (e.g., client interviews narrating their experiences). The article presents clear information regarding sample selection, such as random sampling for quantitative data and purposeful sampling for qualitative interviews. However, a notable weakness is the lack of detail about the duration of the study and possible longitudinal effects, which may enhance understanding (Trochim & Donnelly, 2006).

Data Analysis

Quantitative data were analyzed using statistical methods, including descriptive and inferential statistics, allowing the authors to assess the significance of the outcomes adequately. The qualitative data were analyzed thematically, revealing consistent patterns regarding client satisfaction and challenges faced during therapy sessions. This dual analysis supports a more holistic understanding of the intervention’s effectiveness and strengthens the implications drawn from the findings (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

Review of Discussion and Conclusions

The discussion section of the article synthesizes the findings effectively, noting both the positive outcomes of the CBT program and the contextual factors that clients reported. It addresses limitations such as sample size and potential biases in responses, which is crucial for ensuring the credibility of the research (Draper, 2009). The conclusions drawn propel further discussion regarding the integration of qualitative feedback into quantitative evaluations—an aspect that warrants further research.

Strengths and Weaknesses

The strengths of this study include its robust mixed-methods design, which allows for a more comprehensive understanding of therapeutic impacts. However, weaknesses such as limited follow-up data and potential biases in self-report measures are significant limitations that future studies should address. Such weaknesses may affect the replicability of the findings (McLeod, 2013).

Application to Counseling Practice

Understanding the various research methodologies aids counselors in making informed decisions about interventions. By integrating findings from studies using diverse methods, counselors can better address client needs. For instance, research indicating the efficacy of CBT in reducing anxiety symptoms can inform practice while qualitative insights may highlight areas for improvement in the therapeutic relationship.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the exploration of research methodologies such as qualitative, quantitative, mixed, single-case designs, action research, and outcome-based research underscores their contributions to the counseling profession. Implementing rigorous research practices equips counselors with effective tools to support client progress and enhance therapeutic practices.

References

1. Barker, P., Borys, S., & McCarthy, A. (2009). Outcome-based evaluation in mental health interventions. International Journal of Mental Health, 38(2), 12-28.
2. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
3. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
4. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.
5. Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage.
6. Horner, R. H., & Wiemer, M. (2009). Single case design: A powerful tool for behavior analysis. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 42(1), 1-15.
7. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
8. Kazdin, A. E. (2003). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings. Oxford University Press.
9. McLeod, J. (2013). An introduction to counseling. Open University Press.
10. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2008). The SAGE handbook of action research. Sage.
11. Stringer, E. (2013). Action research. Sage.
12. Trochim, W. M. K., & Donnelly, J. P. (2006). The research methods knowledge base. Cengage Learning.
13. Yardley, L. (2008). Demonstrating validity in qualitative psychology. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research in psychology (pp. 258-272). Sage.