I read Physical activity, stress, and self-reported upper respiratory tract infection by Olle Bälter et al. and Discursive Equality and Everyday Talk Online: The Impact of ‘‘Superparticipants” from the journal Computer-Mediated Communication. These two papers gave me some further base knowledge about quantitative and qualitative data.
During the seminar, Olle Bälter posed questions to us about the pros and cons with qualitative and quantitative research methods.
Some of the pros and cons (what Olle Bälter said and what my group said)
with qualitative:
uncover information about individuals thought and experiences
rich in-depth results which looks beyond percentages to understand people
more adaptable and flexible
smaller nr or participants than for quantitative studies
very specific answers on topic
whole picture answers/results
useful when describing complex phenomenon
with quantitative:
easy to compare and compile results
easy to visualize (graphics)
easy to test large number of peoples
Disadvantages with web questionnaires (vs paper):
Uneven distribution of respondents (age, economy, education)
Reading from screen more demanding
Demands computer and skills
Layout cannot be controlled (in the same way you can do for papers)
Higher initial cost
Lower answering frequency
Technical difficulties
Distribution through email might end up in the spam folder
More easily distracted with web
Advantages with web questionnaires (vs paper):
Easier to distribute
Available on several platforms
Lower distribution cost
Automatic targeting (if you have purchased something on a site you might get the chance to answer their survey)
No need for physical activities when sending it back
Environmental friendly / Reduced carbon footprint
Interactive media available (infographics)
Low marginal cost
Immediate digital storage
Immediate evaluation of answers / Easier to compile results
Individual adaptation
Logic reduces the number of questions
Minimal manual handling
Immediate individual feedback
Questionnaires is not as easy to create as I first thought. The answers should avoid containing ambiguity or several statements. The questionnaire should also be pilot tested before it is sent out to the target group. One way of testing the questionnaire is by the “think out loud”-method where people do the questionnaire but at the same time say everything that they think. This will bring knowledge if there are any problems or confusion either about the technology or the questions.
Olle Bälter said that the best way to have contact with participants is by (step-by-step):
- Invitation via paper letter (without sending the survey)
- Sending Paper survey or URL with password via mail
- Reminder via paper mail
- Reminder via telephone
- Reminder via paper mail
Hi Stephanie!
SvaraRaderaI love that you've written all the advantages/disadvantages that we spoke of at the seminar! I might copy this post and use when thinking about making a questionnaire! ;)
I also made a questionnaire when doing my bachelor essay and the part you write about really having the right formulated questions is something that I've learnt was important! I like your idea about doing a Think-Aloud on the questionnaire before sending it to the respondents. Great job!
Hi!
RaderaI did interviews for my bachelor thesis so I've never really learned how to correctly do questionnaires or surveys. I always kind of thought that they were pretty easy to do. However, it seems like I was pretty wrong. When doing questionnaires it is very easy to write ambiguous question that can be misunderstood. In an interview, usually the interviewee would ask if he/she didn't understand the question and then the interviewer can explain. This is not really the case for questionnaires, and even impossible for the online ones..
Thanks for your comment!
Hi Stephanie,
SvaraRaderaI’m impressed that you manage to write down so many of the pros and cons from the seminar. Most of them I knew before the seminar but I still find it very interesting that they qualitative and quantitative are very different on so many levels. One thing I came to think of was if you are supposed to tell the “think-aloud”-respondent what the questionnaire is about? I can’t recall Olle talk anything about that. It probably isn’t necessary since often the respondent don’t know what the study is about (I think at least?) but on the other hand it might be good for the evaluation of the survey.
Great blogging btw!
Sofia
Hello Sofia!
RaderaThank you for your comment.
I think that when you do a "think-aloud" it is important to try to set an environment that is as close to what the "real" environment will be for the "real" respondents. Of course, it's not going to be identical since the respondent is actually sitting with you.
The respondent should be in your target group and should have similar knowledge as the people in your target group. If you tell the respondent more information (than what you would tell the "real" respondents) it is possible that he/she has less misunderstandings when doing the survey. This way it's possible to miss some possible problems that the "real" respondents may encounter. I think that the “think-aloud” and “real” respondents should have the same information about the questionnaire/survey for the best results.
I hope this made any sense!
Hi Stephanie,
SvaraRaderaI hope you agree it was a pretty fun seminar that brought a lot of engagement in the groups. I like that you write about the think-out-loud-method. I think it can be good to do a lot of test with different people because of the reason that we think in different ways. We met that problem when we made our bachelor thesis survey. Some of the participants answered to the questions in exactly the way we hoped and some didn’t. If we had done this Think-out-loud-method before I think we could have avoided that.