Top 10 Essay Mistakes

For some years now I have had the pleasure of marking student essays and reading their interesting ideas and arguments in relation to a number of healthcare topics. Yet repeatedly, I see the same mistakes being made. These mistakes mean that I cannot assign a higher mark to the work, and that makes me sad. So, I’ve tried to consolidate and explain how to avoid the top 10 essay mistakes.

Want to know how to get higher marks in your essay? Read on…

Top 10 Mistakes Students Make in Their Essays…

1. Always explain acronyms the first time you use them

Many students simply start using acronyms without explaining what they mean. How to fix this? You explain and write first that you are speaking in relation to the United Kingdom (UK)….THEN you can use ‘UK’ throughout the rest of the essay. If you don’t explain it first then I am left guessing as to what you mean throughout the rest of the work.

For further tips on grammar etc… see my other blog post here

2. Ensure correct spelling of practise/practice

This word is often spelled incorrectly. How do you know when to add an ‘S’ or a ‘C’? Try replacing the same sentence with the word ADVICE or ADVISE. The one which sounds more appropriate tells you which to use. For example:

Fitness to ‘advise’ sounds more appropriate than Fitness to ‘advice’. Therefore in this sentence you would spell practice with an ‘S’ so… the correct spelling in this case would be…

Fitness to PractiSe

3. avoid getting your essay structure back to front

Sometimes things can get higgledy piggledy. Your work should flow logically like a story, and it’s structure will depend largely on your own assignment guide….but broadly, appendices will go after reference lists and be labelled and named. You will also need to mention appendices, tables and figures in the main body of the text in order to direct the reader as to where to find things.

A story – a beginning, a middle and an end. Try to follow a narrative structure and your discussions and arguments will follow suit…the best way to do this is with structured assignment planning; each concept and new idea should link together or follow a new introduction.

See my top tips for essay writing here

4. Avoid naked sentences

One single sentence alone does not make a paragraph, yet too often I see this in essays, and it is not particularly useful. Also, I have yet to see anyone make a strong and well reasoned and evidence based argument in only one sentence. More often than not, this will be a single statement, best avoided unless coupled with other meaningful text.

5. Avoid huge chunks of text

A large chunk of text will likely have several points and arguments within it which can get lost overall. If you can break up such large chunks of text into smaller paragraphs, your overall structure will be far stronger. Each paragraph should encompass one argument concisely.

To see how to structure a research paper – See this blog here

6.convince the reader of your argument

When an essay gets a low grade, it is often because the reader is unconvinced of the arguments being made. Sometimes arguments do not go far enough, they are often not concluded. Ensure that you conclude each argument, after you have cited the evidence which lays out your case. For example, you may start the paragraph by saying….

“Johns et al (2020) explain how you can scald yourself by not wearing oven gloves when baking. Equally, Kent et al (2020) emphasize the need to wear oven gloves in the context of cooking in the kitchen. Nevertheless, another study proved that simply letting the oven dish cool down is effective enough in preventing burns in this context (Frog et al, 2020).”

The above example is similar to what I see in a lot of essays. Yet in itself, it does not round up an argument or make a case. It simply states what the evidence is in relation to the topic. To complete the argument, the author needs to draw a conclusion on this. What does this mean? what implications does it have? How strong or weak is the evidence in this regard. This paragraph does not go far enough, and ultimately needs concluding with another sentence or two beginning (for example) with… Therefore… or…As such…(insert very insightful conclusion here).

See my other blog relating specifically to critical analysis here

7.AVOID MAKING LARGE STATEMENTS WITHOUT BACKING THEM UP

Unless you are a world leader or significant and respected public figure, I am afraid you must avoid making large sweeping statements in a sentence without citation. For example, poverty may be a well known issue in many parts of the world. Yet you cannot simply say this (obvious though it may be) without citing a reference which points to the evidence for it. I frequently see this occurring in student essays – I can never assign positive marks to this.

8.ENSURE YOU ARE USING APPROPRIATE REFERENCES

The appropriate use of citations and references is a good thing. It demonstrates evidence of wider reading and makes your arguments stronger. However, the references used must be appropriate in the context of your work and field. In academia, it is generally most appropriate to cite peer reviewed articles from academic journals. Magazines and newspapers may be appropriate to cite in some cases, especially in some specialist fields. However, in nursing and midwifery for example, articles from publications such as ‘The Nursing Times’ will often be secondary sources reporting on the evidence, rather than the primary source of evidence itself. It is always best to cite the primary source of evidence in such cases.

In terms of referencing style, it is important to get this right too. See your own institutions style guide for the particulars.

Top Tip: Google Scholar will give you the top referencing style formats by clicking on the ‘cite’ button under each item listed. Click the ‘ “ ‘ symbol.

To find out how to review the literature, see this blog post.

To find out how to search the literature, see this blog post.

9.AVOID OVER RELYING ON THE WORK OF OTHERS

Too often I see students relying too heavily on the work of others. You should only be referring to the work of others in order to strengthen your own insights and arguments. I cannot give you marks for only telling me what other people say.

10.AVOID BEING OVERLY DESCRIPTIVE

All too often, I see entire paragraphs describing what happened in a particular research study. I can give no marks for this as it is ultimately description. Moreover, I can read the study for myself, so you only really need to give a small description of the study to set the context for what you are trying to say. For example, if you want to talk about the rigor of a study design, all I really need to know is the study design in question. The marks come where you critique, rather than simply describe.

A useful paragraph may begin…

The study by Arthur et al, (2020) included a randomized controlled trial (RCT). RCT’s are generally considered rigorous when….(insightful critique continues)…

See my other blog relating specifically to critical analysis here

…and so we come to the end of our list of avoidable essay mistakes. Now go forth and become the academic unicorn you are.

Follow me via @SallyPezaro; The Academic Midwife; This blog

Until next time…Look after yourselves and each other 

What is critical analysis?

So…you want to know how to write a critical analysis essay? As an academic, I am often asked the following questions:

• What is critical analysis?
• What is critical writing?
• What is the difference between analysis and critical analysis?
• How do you critically Analyse a research paper?
• What are the steps to write a critical essay?
• What does a critical essay mean?

So this article aims to take some of the frustration out of critical writing by breaking things down…

Foucault (1981/1988) clarified that:

“critique is not a matter of saying that things are not right as they are. It is a matter of pointing out on what kind s of assumptions, what kinds of familiar, unchallenged, unconsidered modes of thought the practices that we accept rest…. Criticism is a matter of flushing out that thought and trying to change it: to show that things are not as self-evident as one believed, to see that what is accepted as self-evident will no longer be accepted as such. Practicing criticism is a matter of making facile gestures difficult.” (pp. 154-155)

Critiquing doesn’t mean that you are simply critical in identifying everything bad. After all, one can be a ‘critically acclaimed’ actor. Instead, one has to tease out both the good and the bad. You will also need to decide how much value you will place on any evidence you find, look at the alternatives and decide how you might apply your findings in the real world. Your arguments should be backed up with evidence throughout.

Types of evidence ranked in order of quality from high to low…

A linear representation of critical analysis

Adapted from Plymouth University (2008)

The critical analysis cycle

5 common mistakes in essay writing

In critical analysis, the writer expresses their own evidence based view. As such, any critical analysis is subjective. Yet there are some mistakes people make that make their writing less credible.

• Their tone is personal and familiar rather than academic in nature
• They rely too heavily on the work of others without presenting their own evidence based arguments
• They make bold statements without citing their sources of evidence
• They rely too heavily on description without analysing and evaluating the materials under critique (We can read the material ourselves if description is all we want!)
• Their arguments lack structure and there is limited evidence of wider reading

So how can we move from being descriptive to being critically analytic? The table below outlines the difference between the two…

Descriptive	Critically Analytic
States what happened	Identifies the significance
States what something is like	Identifies the significance
Gives the story so far	Evaluates strengths and weaknesses
States the order things in which things happened	Weighs one piece of information against another Makes reasoned judgments
Says how to do something	Argues a case according to the evidence
Explains what a theory says	Shows why something is relevant or suitable
Explains how something works	Indicates why something will work best
Notes the methods used	Identifies whether something is appropriate or suitable
Says when something occurred	Weighs up the importance of the component parts
States the different components	Evaluates the relative significance of details Structures information in order of importance
States options Lists details	Shows the relevance of links between pieces of information
Lists in any order States links between items	Draws conclusions Identifies why the timing is of importance
Gives information	Gives the reasons for selecting each option

Source – University of Bradford academic skills workshop

Looking at other examples

• Essay examples/Example essays
• 15 Top Essay Writing Tips for Midwifery and Nursing Students
• A guide to literature reviewing

And remember…

•  If you are a student writing an assignment, use this guide together with any assignment specific brief, guideline or marking criteria you may also have been given relating directly to your course.
• It is also important to think about how you will apply your critical analysis to ‘real world’ scenarios – This requires a critical thinking approach, which many writers neglect.

Follow me via @SallyPezaro; The Academic Midwife; This blog

Until next time…Look after yourselves and each other 💚💙💜❤

References

• Plymouth University. (2008) Critical Thinking. Plymouth: Plymouth University. [online]
  Available at: http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/study/cll/othercourses/itt/resource_bank/studyskills/study/rea
  dingskills/8_criticalthinking_summary1.pdf [Accessed 3.6.2015]
• Foucault, M. (1981/1988). Practicing criticism (A. Sheridan, Trans.). In M. Foucault & L. D.
  Kritzman, (Ed), Politics, philosophy, culture: Interviews and other writings, 1977-1984 (pp. 152-158). New York, NY: Routledge.

Being Examined: Tips for your viva

This wisdom comes from the 10th annual ‘Life beyond the PhD’ conference (#CLPhD) hosted at Cumberland Lodge. I was lucky enough to win a scholarship to attend and gather a multitude of hints and tips for my academic career…Now I plan to share them here for those who wish to read them…I have also experienced a viva voce examination…so these viva tips also come from me too.

What is a viva voce?

In a nutshell it is the oral assessment of your PhD Thesis.

So your first viva tip would be….know how a PhD/doctorate/thesis is defined!…Here is a sample of some of the key phrases and expressions relating to ‘doctorateness’:

• worthy of publication either in full or abridged form;

• presents a thesis embodying the results of the research;

• original work which forms an addition to knowledge;

• makes a distinct contribution to the knowledge of the subject and offers evidence of originality shown by the discovery of new facts and/or the exercise of independent critical power;

• shows evidence of systematic study and the ability to relate the results of such study to the general body of knowledge in the subject;

• the thesis should be a demonstrably coherent body of work;

• shows evidence of adequate industry and application;

• understands the relationship of the special theme of the thesis to a wider field of knowledge;

• represents a significant contribution to learning, for example, through the discovery of new knowledge, the connection of previously unrelated facts, the development of new theory or the revision of older views;

• provides originality and independent critical ability and must contain matter suitable for publication;

• adequate knowledge of the field of study;

• competence in appropriate methods of performance and recording of research;

• ability in style and presentation;

• the dissertation is clearly written;

• takes account of previously published work on the subject.

Source: Searching for ‘Doctorateness’.

The problem is…..that a range of literature has pointed out the variability in examination processes across universities, individual examiners, disciplines. Yup, this can be a fairly subjective process. So it is your job within your thesis and within your viva to make your case and convince your examiners that your work is indeed doctoral work.

Within Wellington’s (2013) framework for assessing ‘Doctorateness’, there are seven categories listed for which doctorates may contribute original knowledge. Therefore, in order for ‘Doctorateness’ to be unequivocally established for your thesis, it is important to apply the categories of this framework to each component of your research. The table below was added to my own thesis in order to prove how and why my work was indeed doctoral work.

Category number	Category description	Evidence
1	Building new knowledge, e.g. by extending previous work or ‘putting a new brick in the wall’.	The Delphi method has been used previously to assess the workplace needs of midwifery populations (Hauck, Bayes and Robertson 2012). Yet the views and opinions of an expert panel about the design and development of an online intervention designed to support midwives in work-related psychological distress have been gathered and presented for the first time within this thesis.
2	Using original processes or approaches, e.g. applying new methods or techniques to an existing area of study.	As the Delphi study presented within this thesis was a modified one, where the identity of experts remained unknown to the researcher, and free text response options accompanied each statement, it has also applied somewhat original processes and approaches to an existing area of study.
3	Creating new syntheses, e.g. connecting previous studies or linking existing theories or previous thinkers.	Chapter one presents the first narrative review to integrate studies of midwives in work-related psychological distress (Pezaro et al. 2015). This original knowledge demonstrates how midwives working in rural, poorly resourced areas who experience neonatal and maternal death more frequently can experience death anxieties, where midwives working in urban and well-resourced areas do not. This creation of new syntheses connects previous studies and existing theories together to form new knowledge.   The mixed-methods systematic review presented within chapter three is the first of its kind to collate and present the current and available evidence in relation to existing interventions targeted to support midwives in work-related psychological distress (Pezaro, Clyne and Fulton 2017).
4	Exploring new implications, for either practitioners, policy makers, or theory and theorists.	Chapter two makes an original contribution to ethical decision making, and may be extrapolated and applied to other healthcare professions who may also now consider the provision of confidential support online.
5	Revisiting a recurrent issue or debate, e.g. by offering new evidence, new thinking, or new theory.	The original research presented in chapter two contributes to an ongoing academic dialogue in relation to ethical decision making.
6	Replicating or reproducing earlier work, e.g. from a different place or time, or with a different sample.	The mixed-methods systematic review, presented in chapter three somewhat replicates earlier work from a different place, time, and with a different inclusion sample (Shaw, Downe and Kingdon 2015).
7	Presenting research in a novel way, e.g. new ways of writing, presenting, disseminating.	The results of this research have been disseminated via popular media publications throughout. A further summary of this research is planned for publication. Furthermore, this research has also informed new guidance, published by the Royal College of Midwives, who also present the findings of this research in a new way. This new guidance is intended to guide heads of midwifery to support midwives experiencing work-related stress. Evidence of this can be found in Appendix 15.

Adapting this table to fit your own work should assist you in realizing how your own research can be argued to be doctoral work, both in your thesis and in your viva. Once this argument is clear in your own mind, your confidence should rise and enable you to direct your thoughts towards a really positive goal. Getting your PhD!…and not just because you want it, but because you are worthy of it! You have worked really hard for this opportunity, and seeing your work match up to this framework can really help you to visualize your successes. But now there are other things you can do to help you prepare…

Viva tips

Just because you have submitted your thesis, this does not mean you can sit back a relax until your viva day. Following a short break, and with fresh eyes, you should be revisiting your thesis and getting to know it really well. Also, be sure to keep up to date with any new research arising in your field, it may well be discussed in your viva!

Get to know your university’s policies and procedures. This will help you to prepare for how the viva voce may play out on the day. As your examiners will be drawing upon their own expertise, make sure that you also have a broad knowledge of their work!

Pick your battles. Fighting every point can be really jarring for everyone in the room, and your examiners need to see that you can accept constructive criticism and reflect. Decide what you will really defend, and what you are willing to let go of. This means that you will need to anticipate what your examiners may ask you. Here, it is a good idea to mock up some practice questions. Try defending the questions you fear most. This will help you to face your demons and formulate your arguments….constructively. An extra tip here would be to record yourself arguing your points. How do you sound? are you believable? How do you come across?

Having your supervisor with you can be very reassuring and comforting, although they may well not be allowed to speak during your viva voce. However, try to have them sit next to you or behind you, as eye contact or some other gestures, however well meaning may put you off your game.

Once you get to the viva, be prepared to break the ice. Your examiners are not ogres. They want you to pass! Starting your viva with a warm greeting can set the tone for the session, so don’t start with your defensive wall up too high! You can also set the scene with a short presentation to cover some broad points you anticipate coming up. Use this time to also show your knowledge and demonstrate your own unique way of thinking and working.

If there has been a long gap between your thesis submission and your viva, you may now have moved on to new ways of thinking or changed your original work to move on to a new project. Remember that this new work does not count in your viva. You must remain focused on what you submitted.

If the discussion moves to really complex debates, it is important to keep your cool, remain professional and don’t turn into a robot who has learnt their responses off by heart. Also, don’t be overly humble or point out your own weaknesses directly…if they are raised by the examiners, then you can show respectful considerations to other methods, but it is still important not to shoot yourself in the foot.

Your viva can last a good few hours…it is basically a brain marathon! So you will need to prepare both mentally and physically. This means de-stressing, eating and sleeping well…and generally giving time to your own self care regime. If you need a break during the session, don’t be afraid to ask for one. If you feel overwhelmed at any time, take a constructive pause to write or read and deliberate. It can’t be an extremely emotional and draining experience.

However, some people can enjoy their viva. After all, you will be speaking about your own work with experts in the field for some time. This is a chance to show off, be proud of what you have achieved and even learn more! Thinking in this positive way may make the viva experience not seem so daunting.

I personally found my own viva experience very daunting, emotional and stressful. However, my examiners were not ogres…they too wanted me to pass and to help me make the best of my work… Following the submission of my revised thesis, I realized how much better my thesis now is because of this viva process and the input of my examiners. Having now gone beyond the viva process, I believe that I have truly earned my PhD. I worked hard for it. It didn’t come easy. It was a brain marathon. But would a PhD really be worth having if it was easy to achieve?

I can also now reflect on this process and learn from it. It is an experience that will certainly stay with me and enrich my future work. I hope it will also enable me to improve my own examination and supervisory skills in future.

If you would like to follow the progress of my work going forward..

Follow me via @SallyPezaro; The Academic Midwife; This blog

Until next time…Look after yourselves and each other 💚💙💜❤

 

 

5 career tips for a successful academic application

This wisdom comes from the 10th annual ‘Life beyond the PhD’ conference (#CLPhD) hosted at Cumberland Lodge. I was lucky enough to win a scholarship to attend and gather a multitude of hints and tips for my academic career…Now I plan to share them here for those who wish to read them…

Tip One: Potential employers will want to know how they will benefit from having you work with them as much as, if not more than, how you will benefit from working with them. Why should they invest their money in you? Will they be able to tolerate you on a daily basis? This means that you will need to come across as unselfish, and avoid saying the same thing as everyone else…be different!

Tip Two: Avoid jargon, and make sure you back up your claims with lived examples! For instance..It is no use saying that your I.T skills are fabulous if you don’t back this up with a real lived example of how you have used your I.T skills to do something of real value.

Tip Three: A potential employer will only take a few seconds to scan your CV. Therefore, you need to cut out the gimmicks, reduce it to no more than a couple of pages and make sure that you have used clear and easy to read formatting. Everything on your CV should be in reverse chronological order, and tailored to the job you are applying for. Your cover letter should never be a replication of your CV, yet it should hold lived examples of the skills you have presented.

Tip four: Within your interview,  it will not necessarily matter what answer you give to any awkward interview questions, as long as your answers are void of generic jargon and backed up with a sound rationale for your choice. Also, it is important not to pretend that either you or your research is impervious to failure…what matters is how you handle things and learn.

Tip five: Be yourself, and be honest about any career gaps…being evasive over these issues will only arouse suspicions…the truth is always far more welcome….It’s often not as big a deal as you think, and a good employer will appreciate what you are planning to do to get back on track.

For further hints and tips see this early career researcher blog.

If you would like to follow the progress of my work going forward..

Follow me via @SallyPezaro; The Academic Midwife; This blog

Until next time…Look after yourselves and each other 💚💙💜❤

 

Developing your literature search strategy in 5 easy steps

OK, so you have a research problem that you want to solve or answer using evidence based in the literature. You need to find the right literature and capture it by spreading your net wide, and in the right places. You need a strategy for searching the literature….a search strategy if you will. I hope that these 5 steps will get you to where you want to be.

What is a search strategy?

1.A structured organisation of terms used to search a database

2.A document that shows how terms combine to retrieve the best results

3.Something that must be adapted for each database you use

4.Something which is tailored to the question you are trying to answer

5.A good search strategy is something that takes time to refine

Different ways to search the literature

1.Electronically

2.Manually

3.Snowballing of the literature (going from reference list to reference list to find what you  need.

4.We can do a rapid review of the literature or an exhaustive one

5.We can see what other published literature reviews have done and how they have found their literature for ideas.

6.Ask! (Librarians, authors etc.)… authors of great papers often know of other papers you may be looking for…why not ask them?

Step one: Define your research question or ‘problem’.

First…we will use this as an example: In what ways does midwives’ hand washing impact upon postnatal infections?

	Example:
P (Problem or Patient or Population)	postnatal infections
I (intervention/indicator)	hand washing
C (comparison)	no hand washing
O (outcome of interest)	infection rates and recovery

Click HERE to read a great article on the origins and usage of the PICO framework

Whilst PICO can sometimes be seen as the go to tool for formulating your question…don’t be limited by it. Here are a few other tools to help your formulate your perfect research question…

Methodology  e.g. questionnaires

Issues e.g. ethical decision-making

Participants e.g. midwives or patients

—————————————————

Setting – Where? What is the context?

Perspective – For who?

Intervention (Subject of Interest)– What?

Comparison – What else?

Evaluation – What results?

————————————————————

Sample

Phenomenon of Interest

Design

Evaluation

Research type

————————————————————

Client – who is the service aimed at?

Location – where?

Improvement – what do you want to find out?

Professional – who is involved in providing/improving the service?

——————————————–

Context

Intervention

Mechanism

Outcome

---

CoCoPop is used to frame questions on the prevalence of a condition, disease, problem or symptom.

Condition	Which condition, disease, problem or symptom are you looking at?
Context	When is this happening? Where is this happening? (Geographical location, e.g. Australia / Service location, e.g. hospital)
Population	How is your population defined? (e.g. age, gender, ethnic group …)

———————————————————————————

Expectation—What do you want the information for?

Client Group.

Location.

Impact— What change are you looking for? How is this being measured?

Professionals.

SErvice—For example, community services, birth centres or accident and emergency.

Step two: choose which databases you will search

Different search databases should be searched separately as they each have their own dictionaries of terms and keywords. Each database is tailored toward a particular topic of interest. The following set of databases relate to healthcare topics.

1.Web of Science (strong coverage which goes back to 1990 and most of its journals written in English)

2.Scopus (Covers a superior number of journals but with lower impact and limited to recent articles)

3.CINHAL (Prime source of nursing and allied health literature)

4.Pubmed & MEDLINE (Great starting point for any health or medical literature search.)

5.Cochrane (The source of systematic reviews)

6.NHS Evidence & The TRIP database (Search a limited number of high quality sources)

7.PsychINFO (Prime source for psychology and psychiatry literature.)

8.AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database)

9.HMIC (Health Information Management Consortium – great information from DoH and Kings Fund)

There are no strict rules as to how many databases you should search. That would depend on how thorough you are trying to be. Also, many databases will pick up duplicates for you…which you will later need to delete.

Step three: Identify and map your key concepts

A concept map is a visual representation of concepts within your research question or ‘problem’ and their relationships to each other.

To create a concept map:

• Write down the main concepts which relate to your research question and circle them on a blank page.
• Write down other words/concepts and ideas which relate to each of your concepts in groups. Draw lines between concepts to show how they are related.

Step four: Identify your key words

Some of these you may already have found in your concept mapping work, however, you really need to grab every keyword you can to get the best results…sometimes your databases will already have predefined keywords for you to use….helpful 🙂

To identify your own keywords, you will need to break down your own research question. I will go back to using our example.

In what ways does	Hand washing	among	midwives	impact upon	Postnatal infections?
	‘OR’	‘AND’	‘OR’	‘AND’	‘OR’
	Hand hygiene		Midwifery staff		Postpartum infections
	‘OR’ Clean hands		‘OR’ Midwi*		‘OR’ After birth
	‘OR’ Washed hands				‘OR’ Postnatal sepsis

Step five: Build your concepts and keywords into a search strategy

Sounds easy right? Well let me show you how to do this using an example from one of my published systematic literature reviews.

The questions relating to this review were…

1) What interventions have been developed to support midwives and/or student midwives in work-related psychological distress? and 2) What are the outcomes and experiences associated with the use of these interventions?

Key concepts have been underlined.

Below is a search strategy I built to answer these research questions. This was used to search one database only.

As you can see, the search starts right from the bottom with the first concept ‘midwives’… the ‘population’. Each concept moving forward is grouped together with keywords combined with the boolean operator ‘OR’. When I need to combine concepts nearer the top, I combine them using the boolean operator ‘AND’. See below…

This search strategy also uses truncations, where I have entered the root of the word and then a (*) at the end. When you do this, the database will then return any ending of the root word. Another example of this would be ….child* = child, childs, children, childrens, childhood.

If a word you want to find is spelled in different ways, wildcards can also be used to substitute a symbol for one letter of a word. Examples of how you might use this may be

wom!n = woman, women
colo?r = color, colour

(Credits to https://libraries.mit.edu/experts/)

Click this link for a great example paper, where the authors have mapped their key concepts and search terms to their research questions and databases.

If you are looking to publish a paper and would like me to join your team, I am always happy to be a co-author on your article in exchange for guidance and insight… Not sure how to do this?…see my post…’Why Midwifery and Nursing Students Should Publish their Work and How’ for further info.

I hope you find this ‘How to’ guide useful. I now look forward to you all going forth to develop and share your own search strategies with me. I can’t wait to see what problems you will solve 🙂

If you would like to follow the progress of my work going forward..

Follow me via @SallyPezaro; The Academic Midwife; This blog

Until next time…Look after yourselves and each other 💚💙💜❤

Top tips for #FreshersWeek #freshers2017 #Uni #StudentLife from an academic midwife

Tis that time of year again when students from all over the world descend upon university campuses to embark upon a fun filled journey of learning, adventure and growth.

Having been in education now for a number of years, I think this must be close to my tenth freshers week! Every year I get the same buzzy feeling of excitement as the freshers week commences…

(Unless that is the same feeling of excitement you get when Santa is coming…oh come on…Autumn…I am already thinking about the festive season!)

The streets are full of vibrant things to do and get involved in…people are making friends and connections and everyone is ready to take on a new challenge in life!

The sad thing is…whether I wear my student ID badge, or my staff ID badge..I am seemingly passed by when the invites for the foam parties and other nights out are being dished out…(grump)!…hmm…I wonder why? 🤔🎓 Maybe it will be different this year…and if you do see me on campus…I would love to hear about your plans!

I will be involved in the #CovHLSFreshers Twitter takeover this year..Ooh..snazzy!

 

Our @SallyPezaro who has just finished her PhD with us will also be on hand for this takeover #CovHLSFreshers https://t.co/OkxoXlzfyn

— Tech Enabled Health (@CovUni_CTEHR) 22 September 2017

As well as other survival guides out there, I wanted to share some of my own hints and tips for freshers.

Tip One:

No matter how scared or excited you are during freshers week….I think there are a few quotes that you should memorize and repeat to yourself in times of need….

 

Tip Two:

Remember that there is no need to justify your course choice to anyone but yourself. This is your journey, your life now….trust yourself to make your own life choices. You got this!

Tip Three:

Find your tribe….Not necessarily those who look and talk like you…but those who will hear your voice, sing with you and lift you up. This could be your relevant student society or Twitter community..it could even be those you meet through doing what you love….hold on tight to these people for the ride…and make sure to lift each other up!

Tip Four:

Document your journey and take time to reflect. This experience will be over all too quickly and it’s going to be amazing! reflecting will help you to be mindful about your own situation and recognize your own achievements as your hard work pays off. Be grateful for 1 thing every day…however big or small…and celebrate the achievements of yourself and others every chance you get.

Tip Five:

Look after yourself. Self care can make your university experience a million times better. Take breaks, help yourself before you help others…and as for romance……

See->

10 Tips for Success & Self-Care for Academics

Category Archives: Student Tips 🎓

❤Welcome all!❤

See you on campus!

If you would like to follow the progress of my work going forward..

Follow me via @SallyPezaro; The Academic Midwife; This blog

Until next time…Look after yourselves and each other 💚💙💜❤

 

 

How to conduct research: A dummy’s guide to conducting research

Seminars held by the worlds top universities generally present the most up to date and respected ideas in relation to conducting research. Recently, I was lucky enough to attend a conference where several seminars were held over a one week period…How very convenient!…These seminars in combination were able to map out a broad blue print of how to conduct research for their audiences (myself and other chums).

As a result of attending these wonderful seminars, I am now able to translate what was shared into this dummy’s guide to conducting research. I write here not only to refresh my own knowledge in this area, but also in the hope that it may be of use to the readers of this post. Wish me luck!…

So why do we do research?…Because we have an idea?, a problem to solve?, or an area where a lack of knowledge resides?..(See #whywedoresearch) …These are all valid reasons to conduct research within reason, but…What is research?…

OK, so we need to define a research question…What question, need or idea are we trying to answer?..What itch do we have to scratch? We need to formulate a research question….and also formulate a research problem.

How to identify a research problem

• Explore the nature of the problem. Why is it a problem?.. who does it affect?
• Explore the context of the research problem. Where does it ‘sit’ among other things?
• Define your variables. What would vary?…what can’t you control?…what would be the impact of that?
• Think about what would happen if you didn’t address this problem. What would be the consequences of doing something else?
• Define your objectives? What are you trying to achieve by doing this research?

How to formulate a research question

Think first…is your research question:

• Interesting
• Relevant
• Focused
• Answerable

Then…narrow your ideas down to develop a great research question.

Broad topic	Narrowed topic	Focused topic	Research Question
Children’s health →	Children and diabetes →	School meals and sugar content→	What associations are there between sugar content in school meals and diabetes risk?
Walking →	Walking related injury →	Walking related injury and adults→	In what ways do walking related injuries affect adults?
Bullying →	Teenagers and bullying →	Teen peer pressure and aggressive behavior→	What role, if any, does peer pressure play in the development of aggressive behavior among teens?

                                          

1. Non directional hypothesis = Pregnant women will experience some change in their pattern of urination.
2. Directional hypothesis = Pregnant women will urinate less frequently.
3. Null hypothesis = A statistical assumption. e.g: There will be no difference in the frequency of urination for pregnant women who swim compared with those who do not swim.

And to test this theory…..(quasi-experimental or experimental study design)..we must ascertain the relationship between variables.

Components

Experimental group = Pregnant women swimming

Expected result = e.g Pregnant women will urinate less frequently

Comparison group = Pregnant women who do not swim

Quantitative and qualitative research characteristics….

Characteristic	Quantitative research	Qualitative research
Philosophical origin	Logical positivism	Naturalistic/Interpretive
Focus Reasoning	Concise and objective	Broad and objective
Reasoning	Logistic and deductive	Dialectic and inductive
Basis of knowing	Cause and effect relationships	Meaning, discovery and understanding
Theoretical focus	Tests theory	Develops theory
Researcher involvement	Control	Shared interpretations
Methods of measurement	Structured interviews, questionnaires, observations, scales or measurements	Unstructured interviews and observations
Data	Numbers	Words
Analysis	Statistical analysis	Individual interpretations
Findings	Generalisation, accept or reject theoretical propositions	Uniqueness, understanding of new phenomena and/or theory

Image source and further reading = Crowe, Michael, and Lorraine Sheppard. “Qualitative and quantitative research designs are more similar than different.” Internet Journal of Allied Health Sciences and Practice 8.4 (2010): 5.

Quantitative data analysis methods	Qualitative data analysis methods
Involve statistics/number analysis	Text analysis
Seek deductive interences	Seek inductive inferences
Focus on quantifiable phenomena (comparisons, differences, trends and relationships)	Focus on meanings (themes)
Involve data clustering analysis for relationships in non-hypothesis testing	Involve data structuring and coding into themes and groups.
Involve systematic predetermined analysis	Involve in-depth fluid analysis
Value-free enquiry	Considers the impact a researcher may have on others’ values
Objective	Subjective
Narrow and specific	General and broad

Variable = Anything that varies

Independent variable = does not depend on that of another. Can be introduced or withdrawn by the researcher

Dependent variable = Depends on the independent variables and it’s out come variable e.g: Trauma, bleeding, symptom changes.

Extraneous variable = Unwanted influence that may interfere with either the dependent and/or independent variables.

Demographic variable = Age, gender, race etc.

Top tips:

• We can ask..’What is the relationship between two or more variables?’ However, we cannot infer ’cause and effect’.
• Experimental study designed (hypothesis testing) is considered to be the ‘Gold standard’ for evidence. However, you can gather a multitude of this type of evidence via systematic review and/or meta analysis (See more information on these here or in the image below).
• Ethical considerations should be revisited throughout the study, as well as before commencement.
• Take control of any extraneous variables by random sampling (from a larger sample base), random assignment (into either a control or experimental group), selecting a homogeneous (similar on an important variable) sample and by matching the control to the experimental group on important variables.

In conducting a systematic review, you can also arrive at new research problems and questions…meaning that the possibilities of conducting research are endless!..

But why do all of this hard work if you are not going to share what you have found, analysed, discussed and then concluded?

It is important to publish and share your work at both a high and low level, so that new knowledge is available to everyone!…Students and professors alike should publish. It is never too soon or early in your career to get started on this. If you are not confident about writing or publishing your work, contact me and I will be happy to partner with you throughout the process.

Not sure how to do this?…see my post…’Why Midwifery and Nursing Students Should Publish their Work and How’ for further info.

If you would like to follow the progress of my work going forward..

Follow me via @SallyPezaro; The Academic Midwife; This blog

Until next time…Look after yourselves and each other 💚💙💜❤

How to Structure a Research Paper

OK, there are many ways to structure a research paper, and I would urge everyone to follow the guidelines of which ever journal, school or university they are writing for. However, have you ever wondered how to structure a research paper? (A typical one anyway)!…Well I have put together one structure which you may find useful in your writing and planning (I certainly have).

Introduction:

• State what this paper going to do, say or explore
• State why your topic or ‘problem’ is important – why should we care about it?
• State what we already know about this issue, and what is yet to learn
• What are you aiming to do with this work? If you are answering a problem, what are your research question(s)?

Background:

• If the word count allows, give the reader a broader picture of your topic and what you are trying to highlight with the problem you have identified
• What is the prevalence of your problem? – Give us some stats
• What could be changed for the better? – Tell us what has already been tried

Methods:

• Tell us exactly what you have done in order to get the results and findings of this study
• Tell us where your study took place and in what context
• State the type of study you chose to use, and why that particular design was appropriate in your case
• Who did you include in your study? – Tell us about them
• State how you recruited this sample of participants for your study in detail – How many? where? why?
• Describe in detail the process you went through to gather your data
• If you use an intervention, describe it in detail
• Tell us whether or not there were any variables in this study, is there anything we should know about?
• How did you collect or ‘extract’ data for this study? – Tell us, and be sure to mention any instruments or tools that were used in this data collection, and why they were chosen
• State in detail how you analysed the data you collected

Results:

• How did it all go? Tell us who responded, what your drop out rates where and how many participants took part overall
• Describe those who did take part – were they men? women? old? young?… where were they from and what conditions did they have?
• Go back to your research question – Tell us what key findings relate back to answering these questions and how
• What else did you find out – Tell us the interesting bits, the correlations, the secondary findings which came out of your work

Discussion:

• Give the reader a quick recap summary of your overall results/findings
• Discuss what you found in relation to previous research – How do your findings differ from or confirm previous conclusions?
• Discuss the implications of what you have found – what might change? and who might benefit from knowing?
• Make sure you do not overstate your findings or exaggerate (I am guilty of this too)! – List the limitations and strengths of your study
• Offer some thoughts on what research may come next

Conclusions:

If you have covered all of the points above, all you should need to do here is describe what your paper has done, and what is has added to the literature. Leave the reader with some closing thoughts and remarks, before declaring any conflicts of interest and/or funding sources.

Top academic writing tips:

• Consider whether your work may be improved by applying a theory to underpin it
• Think about which other frameworks and/or evidence may underpin your work
• Consider using a reporting framework or guideline to strengthen the standard of reporting in your work (also….ensure that the framework is suited to the type of research you are doing) – See list here. 
• How else might you ensure rigor in your research? – Use peer review, risk of bias and quality appraisal tools to check your work
• Be proud of what you have achieved… always. You are always ahead of those who have yet to begin 💜🎓💜

If you are looking to publish a paper and would like me to join your team, I am always happy to be a co-author on your article in exchange for guidance and insight..Not sure how to do this?…see my post…’Why Midwifery and Nursing Students Should Publish their Work and How’ for further info.

Further reading:

Huth EJ. How to Write and Publish Papers in the Medical Sciences, 2nd edition. Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins,1990.

Browner WS. Publishing and Presenting Clinical Research. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, 1999.

Devers KJ , Frankel RM. Getting qualitative research published. Educ Health 2001; 14: 109–117.

Docherty M, Smith R. The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers. Br Med J 1999; 318: 1224–1225.

Perneger, T V, Hudelson P M; Writing a research article: advice to beginners. Int J Qual Health Care 2004; 16 (3): 191-192. doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzh053

—————————————————————————————————————————————–

If you would like to follow the progress of my work going forward..

Follow me via @SallyPezaro; The Academic Midwife; This blog

Until next time…Look after yourselves and each other 

How do you decide which type of review to use? a guide to beat the literature reviewing blues…

Recently, I have been in search of the perfect methodology for reviewing the literature. So many options…benefits, limitations and choices…I found it really hard to choose the right one.. Which reviewing methodology would Goldilocks choose? which one is just right for you?.. After all of my searching, I thought it my be useful to make a listed guide to what I have found…

So… first of all, what is a literature review?…as always, the academic community will debate around this subject… but feel free to browse my  ‘Guide to Literature Reviewing for Student Midwives & Student Nurses’ here

Perceived strengths.  The literature review method seeks to identify what has been accomplished previously, allowing for consolidation, for building on previous work, for summation, for avoiding duplication and for identifying omissions or gaps.

Perceived weaknesses.  Literature reviews lack an explicit intent to maximise scope or analyse data collected. Any conclusions they may reach are therefore open to bias from the potential to omit, perhaps inadvertently, significant sections of the literature or by not questioning the validity of statements made. Additionally, authors may only select literature that supports their world view, lending undue credence to a preferred hypothesis.

Grant, Maria J., and Andrew Booth. “A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies.” Health Information & Libraries Journal 26.2 (2009): 91-108.

But there are many types of literature review that can do much more than simply review the literature…so how do you know which one to choose?

In order to decide which type of review to use, you will need to decide what you are trying to do, find out, or achieve.

Trying to develop a new concept? theory? or model?

Then you may want to explore the use of a critical literature review methodology. This methodology allows you to demonstrate how you have not only extensively researched a topic, but that you can critically evaluate the literature and take new conclusions and interpretations from it. You can then present these new interpretations as a new hypothesis or model… sounds good right?

Search

Not systematic – You are searching to find the most relevant stuff.

Appraisal

No need to evaluate quality -You are looking for literature which is fit for purpose.

Synthesis

Usually narrative, but you can be creative with this.

Analysis

Needs to arrive at a new conceptual theory or hypothesis of some kind.

Cautions

Every conclusion you draw will be subjective – Others may not be able to repeat your process

Looking to identify gaps in research?

Then you may want to conduct a mapping review of the literature. This methodology allows you to map out and categorise the existing literature on a topic. From this you can identify what other kinds of reviews or research need doing, as you identify gaps in the literature.

Search

Can be systematic, but searching is usually bound by time constraints, so this can be determined in line with your scope.

Appraisal

No need to evaluate quality

Synthesis

Use tables and graphics

Analysis

Quantify the research found and outline study types – suggest areas of future research.

Cautions

Can be overly descriptive, try to characterise studies on more than the basis of study design

Want to combine statistical data to provide more precise results?

In this case you may consider doing a the meta-analysis (A type of analysis done within a literature review – so really, this is one component of or add on to a systematic review).

Search

Thorough, comprehensive, systematic – Can use funnel plot

Appraisal

Use quality appraisal to guide inclusion/exclusion and/or sensitivity analyses

Synthesis

Use tables, graphics and narrative

Analysis

Analyses measures of effect numerically

Cautions

Your review can only be as good as the included studies allow..also, there is little value in comparing very diverse study types.

Want to combine quantitative with qualitative?

If you want to explore a complex problem using both qualitative and quantitative literature, then a mixed-methods review is for you…

Search

Your strategy must capture both quantitative and qualitative research

Appraisal

Need to use an appraisal tool appropriate for both qualitative, quantitative and/or mixed-methods research

Synthesis

Use tables, graphics and narrative – Present qualitative and quantitative results separately

Analysis

Look for correlations, gaps in the literature and draw conclusions based on combined findings.

Cautions

Theoretical and methodological challenges in bringing together qualitative and quantitative studies

Need to assess what is already known about a topic?

A rapid review is for you.

Search

Determined by time constraints

Appraisal

Formal quality appraisal required

Synthesis

Use tables and narrative

Analysis

Look for directions of effect, and quality and quantity of the literature

Cautions

Doing things quickly…you always run the risk of bias and mistakes are more easily made

Want to know the size and scope of available research?

A Scoping review is for you..

Search

You may want to perform your search as a research in progress

Appraisal

No formal quality appraisal is required

Synthesis

Use tables and narrative.. you can also use commentary

Analysis

Look for directions for future research – Use this to form new research questions.

Cautions

This is not usually a final output…rather a means to an end

Want to address really current matters?

When you want to offer new perspectives on a current issue or point out a new area for further research, you may consider conducting a state-of-the-art review.

Search

Comprehensive and current

Appraisal

No formal quality appraisal is required

Synthesis

Use tables and narrative

Analysis

Present a current state of knowledge and list priorities for future research

Cautions

Beware of subject experts’ particularly idiosyncratic and personal perspectives on current and future priorities.

Want to systematically search for, appraise and synthesis research evidence?

If you are looking to do more than a just review or systematize the literature, then a systematic literature review is for you.

Search

Comprehensive exhaustive and systematic

Appraisal

Formal quality appraisal is required – This can be used to exclude research of poor quality

Synthesis

Use tables and narrative

Analysis

Present recommendations for future research based on what is known, what remains unknown, and what we are still unsure about…The review should answer a broad research question.

Cautions

Adhere to reporting guidelines for a strong output.

Want to create an accessible and usable document in relation to a broad issue?

If you would like to highlight reviews that address interventions and their results in relation to a broad issue, then an umbrella review is for you.

Search

Only searches for component reviews

Appraisal

Formal quality appraisal  for reviews is required

Synthesis

Use tables, graphics and narrative

Analysis

Present recommendations for future research based on what is known, what remains unknown, and what we are still unsure about…The review should consolidate all that is known about one broad issue.

Cautions

Requires the pre-existence of the narrower component reviews

Want to know what works, for whom, in what circumstances . . . and why?

If you want to unpack the mechanism(s) of how and why complex interventions thrive or fail, in particular setting(s), then the realist review methodology is for you!

Search

Highly detailed and systematic

Appraisal

Justify how judgments were made

Synthesis

Use tables, graphics and narrative – include information on the constructs analysed and describe the analytic process.

Analysis

Present the key findings with a specific focus on theory building and testing

Cautions

Ensure that the RAMESES (Realist And MEta-narrative Evidence Syntheses: Evolving Standards) guidelines and standards are adhered to for a strong output.

So…have we made a decision, are we sitting comfortably? are we ready to begin?…Let me know how you get on, and please share any additionally methodologies I may have missed.

If you are looking to publish a paper and would like me to join your team, I am always happy to be a co-author on your article in exchange for guidance and insight..Not sure how to do this?…see my post…’Why Midwifery and Nursing Students Should Publish their Work and How’ for further info.

Until next times, take care of yourselves…and each other 🌟🎓🌟

An exploration of mixed-methods research

What is Mixed-methods research?…. a mixture of methods? …or a multitude of methods in either one study or a succession of research?….Yes….it is a pickle.

What is mixed methods research?

I am on a learning curve (as always)…and I have been refining my understanding of mixed methods research…so what is mixed-methods research as I understand it now?

Firstly…what is a method?

I like to think of it as a recipe. Everyone knows a recipe for making a Victoria sponge…Eggs, sugar, butter, jam…and cream….But perhaps my method is different from your method..I add vanilla essence….you prefer yours with blackcurrant jam….We are both using a recipe or ‘method’ for making a Victoria sponge…

It’s just that the recipe or ‘method’ has both agreed standards… and modified versions.

So…in research terms, I used to think of mixed-methods as literally a mixture of methods used in a single study….perhaps questionnaires and interviews…or a focus group and a literature review…But there are others who have defined it differently. Basically…we are actually looking at a mixture of both qualitative and quantitative research in one study/paper…Here are some other definitions below from leaders in the field..

Pat Bazeley: I tend to distinguish between mixed methods and multimethod, although if I need a generic term, I used mixed methods. Multimethod research is when different approaches or methods are used in parallel or sequence but are not integrated until inferences are being made. Mixed methods research involves the use of more than one approach to or method of design, data collection or data analysis within a single program of study, with integration of the different approaches or methods occurring during the program of study, and not just at its concluding point. Note that I am not limiting this to a combination of qualitative and quantitative research only, but more broadly, combinations of any different approaches/methods/data/analyses.

 

Valerie Caracelli: A mixed method study is one that planfully juxtaposes or combines methods of different types (qualitative and quantitative) to provide a more elaborated understanding of the phenomenon of interest (including its context) and, as well, to gain greater confidence in the conclusions generated by the evaluation study.

 

Huey Chen: Mixed methods research is a systematic integration of quantitative and qualitative methods in a single study for purposes of obtaining a fuller picture and deeper understanding of a phenomenon. Mixed methods can be integrated in such a way that qualitative and quantitative methods retain their original structures and procedures (pure form mixed methods). Alternatively, these two methods can be adapted, altered, or synthesized to fit the research and cost situations of the study (modified form mixed methods).

 

John Creswell: Mixed methods research is a research design (or methodology) in which the researcher collects, analyzes, and mixes (integrates or connects) both quantitative and qualitative data in a single study or a multiphase program of inquiry.

 

Steve Currall: Mixed methods research involves the sequential or simultaneous use of both qualitative and quantitative data collection and/or data analysis techniques.

 

Marvin Formosa: Mixed methods research is the utilitization of two or more different methods to meet the aims of a research project as best as one can. The research project may be conducted from either one or two paradigmatic standpoints (mixed methodology study).

 

Jennifer Greene: Mixed method inquiry is an approach to investigating the social world that ideally involves more than one methodological tradition and thus more than one way of knowing, along with more than one kind of technique for gathering, analyzing, and representing human phenomena, all for the purpose of better understanding.

 

Al Hunter: Mixed methods is a term that is usually used to designate combining qualitative and quantitative research methods in the same research project. I prefer the term multimethod research to indicate that different styles of research may be combined in the same research project. These need not be restricted to quantitative and qualitative; but may include, for example, qualitative participant observation with qualitative in-depth interviewing. Alternatively it could include quantitative survey research with quantitative experimental research. And of course it would include quantitative with qualitative styles.

 

Burke Johnson and Anthony Onwuegbuzie: Mixed methods research is the class of research where the researcher mixes or combines quantitative and qualitative research techniques, methods, approaches, concepts or language into a single study or set of related studies.

 

Udo Kelle: Mixed methods means the combination of different qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and data analysis in one empirical research project. This combination can serve for two different purposes: it can help to discover and to handle threats for validity arising from the use of qualitative or quantitative research by applying methods from the alternative methodological tradition and can thus ensure good scientific practice by enhancing the validity of methods and research findings. Or it can be used to gain a fuller picture and deeper understanding of the investigated phenomenon by relating complementary findings to each other which result from the use of methods from the different methodological traditions of qualitative and quantitative research.

 

Donna Mertens: Mixed methods research, when undertaken from a transformative stance, is the use of qualitative and quantitative methods that allow for the collection of data about historical and contextual factors, with special emphasis on issues of power that can influence the achievement of social justice and avoidance of oppression.

 

Steven Miller: Mixed methods is a form of evolving methodological inquiry, primarily directed to the human sciences, which attempts to combine in some logical order the differing techniques and procedures of quantitative, qualitative and historical approaches. At present mixed methods must devote itself to resolving a set of issues, both epistemological and ontological. The first must devote itself to what Miller and Gatta (2006) call the “epistemological link,” that is the rules and rationales which “permit” one to proceed mixed methodologically. The second must adhere to some form of “minimal realist” ontology, where either social reality is “One” but can be accessed by different methods separately or working in conjunction, or social reality is multiple in nature and can ONLY be accessed through mixed methods. Present day attempts to couch mixed methods within some broad notion of pragmatism are not satisfactory.

 

Janice Morse: A mixed method design is a plan for a scientifically rigorous research process comprised of a qualitative or quantitative core component that directs the theoretical drive, with qualitative or quantitative supplementary component(s). These components of the research fit together to enhance description, understanding and can either be conducted simultaneously or sequentially.

 

Isadore Newman: Mixed methods research is a set of procedures that should be used when integrating qualitative and quantitative procedures reflects the research question(s) better than each can independently. The combining of quantitative and qualitative methods should better inform the researcher and the effectiveness of mixed methods should be evaluated based upon how the approach enables the investigator to answer the research question(s) embedded in the purpose(s) (why the study is being conducted or is needed; the justification) of the study. (See Newman, Ridenour, Newman & DeMarco, 2003.)

 

Michael Q. Patton: I consider mixed methods to be inquiring into a question using different data sources and design elements in such a way as to bring different perspectives to bear in the inquiry and therefore support triangulation of the findings. In this regard, using different methods to examine different questions in the same overall study is not mixed methods.

 

Hallie Preskill: Mixed methods research refers to the use of data collection methods that collect both quantitative and qualitative data. Mixed methods research acknowledges that all methods have inherent biases and weaknesses; that using a mixed method approach increases the likelihood that the sum of the data collected will be richer, more meaningful, and ultimately more useful in answering the research questions.

 

Margarete Sandelowski: First, I think of this in terms of either a single primary research study or as a program of research. Then, I see mixed methods as something of a misnomer as mixing implies blending together. Mixed methods research, though, is more the use of different methodological approaches TOGETHER in a single study or single program of research. One cannot blend methods in the sense of assimilating one into the other. I use methods here to refer to larger inquiry approaches (e.g., experiments and grounded theory) which are themselves based in distinctive theoretical perspectives. Yet this sets up a problem too, as grounded theory, for example, can be “positivist” (a la Strauss & Corbin), “constructivist” (a la Charmaz), or “postmodern” (a la Clarke) in sensibility or influence. So, if a researcher is doing grounded theory (positivist style) and an experiment (positivist influence), are any methods actually being mixed? In other words, mixed methods research can be defined at the technique level as the combination of, e.g., purposeful & probability sampling, open-ended and closed-ended data collection techniques, and narrative and mutivariable analyses—i.e., in which anything can be used together (linked or assimilated into each other)—or it can be defined at a larger theoretical/paradigmatic level as using divergent approaches to inquiry together. I would not define mixed methods research as constituting ANY combination of 2 or more things, as any research involves the use of 2 or more of something and the use of experiment and survey is 2 things, but they are informed by one mind (typically positivist/objectivist/realist). We get tangled in words, do we not?

 

Lyn Shulha: By collaborative mixed method research, we will mean the purposeful application of a multiple person, multiple perspective approach to questions of research and evaluation. Decisions about how methods are combined and how analyses are conducted are grounded in the needs and emerging complexity of each project rather than in preordinate methodological conventions. . . . Within this context, methods can be “mixed” in a variety of ways. Sometimes, one method serves another in validating and explicating findings that emerge from a dominant approach. On other occasions, different methods are used for different parts of the issues being investigated, and in an independent way. In more complex cases, the methods and perspectives are deliberately mixed from the beginning of the process. The resulting interaction of problem, method, and results produce a more comprehensive, internally consistent, and ultimately, more valid general approach. What sets the most complex forms of collaborative mixed method research apart from other forms of inquiry is that findings depend as much on the researchers’ capacities to learn through joint effort and to construct joint meaning as on their expertise in conventional data collection and analysis techniques.

 

Abbas Tashakkori and Charles Teddlie: Mixed methods research is a type of research design in which QUAL and QUAN approaches are used in type of questions, research methods, data collection and analysis procedures, or in inferences.

 

Note: QUAL = qualitative research; QUAN = quantitative research

Source for quotes = Toward a Definition of Mixed Methods Research R. Burke Johnson University of South Alabama, Mobile Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie University of South Florida, Tampa Lisa A. Turner University of South Alabama, Mobile

There are also now reporting guidelines emerging for Mixed Methods studies (O’Cathain, Alicia, Elizabeth Murphy, and Jon Nicholl. “The quality of mixed methods studies in health services research.” Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 13.2 (2008): 92-98.)

Good Reporting of A Mixed Methods Study (GRAMMS)…Guidelines as follows…

(1) Describe the justification for using a mixed methods approach to the research question

(2) Describe the design in terms of the purpose, priority and sequence of methods

(3) Describe each method in terms of sampling, data collection and analysis

(4) Describe where integration has occurred, how it has occurred and who has participated in it

(5) Describe any limitation of one method associated with the present of the other method

(6) Describe any insights gained from mixing or integrating methods

Mixed methods research is more specific in that it includes the mixing of qualitative and quantitative data, methods, methodologies, and/or paradigms in a research study or set of related studies. One could argue that mixed methods research is a special case of multimethod research.

 

 

If you are looking to publish a paper and would like me to join your team, I am always happy to be a co-author on your article in exchange for guidance and insight..Not sure how to do this?…see my post…’Why Midwifery and Nursing Students Should Publish their Work and How’ for further info.

So until next time… look after yourselves & each other…then …in the words of Bob Marley…go ahead and stir it up….🎓💜🌟