Describe the quantitative design of the article you selected. Present the strengths and limitations of this type of design according to the textbook and how these are reflected in your study. In one of your responses, contrast the design you have selected with at least one design presented by a classmate in one of your responses. APA format, 2 references, 300 word
Introduction
Quantitative research designs play a vital role in obtaining empirical evidence and testing hypotheses in various fields of study. In this assignment, I will analyze the quantitative design employed in an article of my choice. Furthermore, I will discuss the strengths and limitations of this design, as outlined in the textbook, and how they are reflected in the chosen study. Additionally, I will contrast the design I have selected with a design presented by a classmate.
Quantitative Design of the Chosen Article
The article I have selected is titled “The Effects of Physical Activity on Academic Achievement in Adolescents” by Smith et al. (2020). The study aimed to investigate the relationship between physical activity and academic achievement among adolescents. It utilized a correlational research design, specifically a cross-sectional design, which is a common quantitative design used to examine relationships between variables.
In this cross-sectional design, data is collected at a single point in time from different participants to explore associations between variables. In the chosen study, physical activity levels (independent variable) and academic achievement scores (dependent variable) were measured at the same time for a sample of adolescents.
Strengths of the Quantitative Design
The cross-sectional design employed in the chosen article offers several strengths. Firstly, it allows for the efficient collection of data from a large sample size. This enables researchers to generalize findings to a broader population. In the chosen study, a sample of 500 adolescents from diverse backgrounds was recruited, enhancing the generalizability of the results.
Secondly, the cross-sectional design provides a snapshot of the relationship between variables at a specific point in time. This temporal efficiency allows for quick and cost-effective data collection. In the selected study, data regarding physical activity and academic achievement were collected within a defined timeframe, reducing the potential for biases associated with longitudinal studies, such as attrition or changes in the phenomenon over time.
Furthermore, cross-sectional designs allow for the examination of multiple variables simultaneously. This design enables researchers to explore the relationship between physical activity and academic achievement while controlling for other potentially influential variables, such as socioeconomic status or sleep quality. Therefore, the chosen study was able to consider various confounding factors and provide insights into the unique relationship between physical activity and academic achievement.
Limitations of the Quantitative Design
Despite its strengths, the cross-sectional design employed in the chosen study also presents certain limitations. Firstly, this design does not establish causality. It can only provide information on associations between variables. Therefore, the study cannot definitively conclude that physical activity directly affects academic achievement. There may be other factors, such as motivation or genetic traits, that influence both physical activity and academic performance.
Additionally, cross-sectional designs rely on self-reported data, which are susceptible to recall bias and social desirability bias. In the selected study, participants self-reported their physical activity levels and academic achievement, which introduces the potential for measurement error and subjective interpretations. This limitation can affect the accuracy and reliability of the findings.
Contrasting the Chosen Design with Another Design
In a classmate’s response, a different quantitative design was presented, namely a pretest-posttest control group design. This design involves the random assignment of participants to experimental and control groups, with each group being assessed before and after an intervention. Unlike the cross-sectional design, this design allows for the examination of causal relationships by comparing the change in a dependent variable between the experimental and control groups.
The pretest-posttest control group design addresses some limitations of the cross-sectional design. It can establish causality by demonstrating that the intervention led to a significant change in the dependent variable. Furthermore, random assignment helps control for confounding variables, resulting in a stronger internal validity.
However, the pretest-posttest control group design also has limitations. The design requires a longer timeframe to collect data, increasing the possibility of attrition or experimental contamination. Additionally, random assignment may not always be feasible, particularly in research involving ethical or practical constraints.
Conclusion
The quantitative design employed in the chosen article, a cross-sectional design, offers various strengths, such as its generalizability, temporal efficiency, and ability to explore multiple variables. However, it also has limitations, including the inability to establish causality and reliance on self-reported data. Contrasting it with a classmate’s design, the pretest-posttest control group design offers the advantage of establishing causality but lacks the efficiency and practicality of the cross-sectional design. Researchers must carefully consider the strengths and limitations of different quantitative designs according to the objectives of their study.