Content area
Full Text
Demystifying the research process often involves understanding research terminology, the rationale for the selection of a research design, and the known benefits and consequences in the selection of a design. This commentary discusses the major aspects of a well-known and used quantitative research design in nursing research used by Tourigny, Clendinneng, Chartrand, and Gaboury (2011) to evaluate the utility of a virtual education tool for pediatric patients undergoing same-day surgery. The rationale for why this design was chosen by these nurse researchers and its advantages and disadvantages are discussed.
A research design is the overall plan for answering research questions and hypotheses. The design spells out strategies the researcher adopts to gather accurate, objective, and interpretable information (Polit & Beck, 2007). Tourigny et al. (2011) used a non-experimental, quantitative research design known as a descriptive, comparative design. It is also known as casual comparative research and pre-experimental research. The basic purpose of these designs is to determine the relationship among variables. The most important distinctions between these designs and experimental designs are no control (manipulation) of the independent variable (IV) and no random assignment of study subjects to the intervention or control group. These designs are frequently used in nursing research studies because nurse researchers are often faced with these specific limitations.
In summary, the known properties of descriptive, comparative research studies are 1) no manipulation of an independent variable, 2) no random assignment to groups, and 3) often inclusion of a control or comparison group. The paradigm for these studies is diagrammed in Figure 1.
In this diagram (see Figure 1), the researcher hypothesizes that "X" is related to and a determinant (cause) of "Y," but the presumed causes are not manipulated, and subjects are not randomly assigned to groups (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2010). Rather, a group of subjects who has experienced "X" in a natural situation is located, and a control group of subjects who has not experienced "X" is chosen. The behavior performance or condition of the two groups is compared to determine whether the exposure to "X" had an effect predicted by the hypothesis (LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 2010). Tourigny et al. (2011) hypothesized a determinant of study participants' level of knowledge about hospital equipment and procedures, and their emotional state would...