Data Collection Techniques and Self-Report Measures

Data Collection Techniques and Self-Report Measures

Instructions:

Data Collection Techniques and Self-Report Measures

Introduction

These are data collection techniques that are widely implemented in psychological studies. They consist of measures where a person is exposed to a set of questions that they are expected to answer either through an interview or questionnaire (Razavi, 2001).

They are two common types of self-report measures both of which will be discussed in the following passages. They will be compared against each other and the unique qualities of each, determined.

Free-Format Self-Report Measures

If I were a researcher, I would pick Open-ended questions as my preferred free format self-report measure of choice. Though time-consuming and kind of a little bit tedious, this method provides more insight into the subject matter by allowing the participants to freely share their thought processes and feelings without any hold-backs (Bradburn, Sudman, & Wansink, 2004).

I would probably stick with the same option as a participant since as human beings, all we wish for is to be part of something and being able to freely share my opinions without constraints fulfills this need. The drawbacks of these types of self-report measures, though, is that it becomes too difficult to convert each and every single participant’s opinion into measurable variables.

Fixed-Format Self-Report Measures

In this type of self-report measure, participants are still expected to answer questions; though these questions are a bit different than those in free format self-report measures because they possess a more structured composition. My preferred measure in this case is the Likert scale.

This is mainly because of the fact that it is quite simple to apply and also just as easy to interpret as well. The scale involves a series of choices that depict whether the participant agrees or disagrees with the variable to be measure and also offers a neutral point; where the participant neither agrees nor disagrees with the subject matter (Esterman, 2003).

As a participant I would still stick to the Likert scale; if I were to even choose fixed format self-report measures for that matter. This is because the Likert scale is commonly used hence proving its sense of credibility and reliability.

References

Bradburn, N., Sudman, S., & Wansink, B. (2004). Asking questions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Esterman, A. (2003). The Likert scale. Canberra: Australasian Epidemiological Association.

Razavi, T. (2001). Self-report measures. Southampton: School of Management, University of Southampton

Data Collection Techniques and Self-Report Measures

RUBRIC
Excellent Quality 95-100%	Introduction 45-41 points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.		Literature Support 91-84  points The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.			Methodology 58-53 points Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score 50-85%	40-38 points More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.		83-76  points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.			52-49  points Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality 0-45%	37-1 points The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.		75-1 points Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.			48-1 points There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow Data Collection Techniques and Self-Report Measures

Data Collection Techniques and Self-Report Measures

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!