1,440 research outputs found
Mixed structural group interaction analysis
Get PDFIn this chapter, we advocate for an approach in which a pre-study is integrated in research into group interactions: Mixed Structural Group Interaction Analysis. The aim of the pre-study is to collect data on latent social relationships that informs the data collection, analysis, and interpretation of the main research. Based on theories and empirical insight from social network analysis, we address the “why” and “how” of this argument. Specifically, we show how a relational pre-study could be integrated with group interaction data collection and analysis in a development-type mixed-methods research design
Co-evolution models of longitudinally measured interactions
Get PDFLongitudinal social networks analysis enables us to investigate interactions among group members over time. It allows to model individuals’ positions within groups and personal characteristics or attributes simultaneously and how they change over time. One of the main fundamental mechanisms of relationship formation is homophily, which means that individuals are intended to connect to someone else who is similar to them in terms of background characteristics or behavior. The question arises whether individuals select each other because they are similar or whether they do become more similar over time. Longitudinal network analysis provides the possibility to disentangle selection effects from influence effects, that is, what effects can be explained through individuals selecting specific other group members versus how individuals’ behaviors or characteristics are influenced by the interaction with others within a certain context and at a certain moment. This chapter provides a guideline how to conduct longitudinal social network analysis to analyze group interactions, including the basics of stochastic actor-based modeling.<br/
Rating conference
No full textThe following text introduces a relatively new mixed-method instrument called “rating conference.” It combines a short preceding questionnaire (“rating”) with a subsequent structured focus group interview (“conference”). A core characteristic of a rating conference is the integration of qualitative and quantitative data assessment: Individual item ratings are transferred onto a sheet or screen visible to all participants, which stimulates and guides a subsequent group discussion. While the rating of the questionnaire items gives a quick overview of the participants’ general perspectives on a given topic, the subsequent focus group discussion uncovers an individual’s experiences, attitudes, evaluations, and emotions with regard to the ratings and in the light of a group view. Thus, the integration of the two methods into one instrument reveals an individual’s as well as a collective perspective on the research topic and helps to understand distinct as well as shared knowledge. In the case of the assessment of several rating conferences, comparisons between different groups can be drawn
Planning in Brazil, India and Germany
Get PDFPlanning is a fundamental cognitive ability that helps in organizing and structuring events unfolding in a person\u27s daily life. Two studies are presented that analyze planning behavior in different cultures: Brazil, India, and Germany. The first is a cross-cultural psychological study in which students develop plans for uncertain problem scenarios. The second study follows a cultural psychological tradition. Workers from different domains are interviewed about their life problems and plans. The strengths and the weaknesses of both approaches become obvious in the description and discussion of these two studies. The cross-cultural study sheds light on cross-cultural similarities and differences in planning in Brazil, India, and Germany. The cultural psychological approach yields data regarding a theoretical model on the specific cultural influences on planning
Rating conference
No full textThe following text introduces a relatively new mixed-method instrument called “rating conference.” It combines a short preceding questionnaire (“rating”) with a subsequent structured focus group interview (“conference”). A core characteristic of a rating conference is the integration of qualitative and quantitative data assessment: Individual item ratings are transferred onto a sheet or screen visible to all participants, which stimulates and guides a subsequent group discussion. While the rating of the questionnaire items gives a quick overview of the participants’ general perspectives on a given topic, the subsequent focus group discussion uncovers an individual’s experiences, attitudes, evaluations, and emotions with regard to the ratings and in the light of a group view. Thus, the integration of the two methods into one instrument reveals an individual’s as well as a collective perspective on the research topic and helps to understand distinct as well as shared knowledge. In the case of the assessment of several rating conferences, comparisons between different groups can be drawn
Network validity
No full text“Carelessness in system specification is probably a more serious issue for network analysis than for much survey analysis” - this quote by Laumann et al. (1983, p. 19) is becoming more and more relevant, given the increasing popularity of social network analysis (SNA) in a variety of academic disciplines (Froehlich, 2020). Criticism has been voiced against the validity of many SNA studies. This includes, for instance, the missing generalizability of much SNA work, theoretical underspecification, or conceptual slippage of the term “network”.
Lots has been written about the validity and reliability of different social network measurement techniques and methods, but far less about the validity of the notion of 'network'. In this presentation, we pick up this gap and focus on a specific instance of validity that we call network validity. Some thoughts have been spent on the topic, especially under the banner of the boundary specification problem. However, with this framework of network validity presented here, we hope to show that there are more considerations to be taken into account to have a valid network study. The main question we pose is how to determine whether the thing that we’re studying using network methods actually constitutes a network and what kind of network it is. In developing our argument, we refer to Dellinger and Leech’s (2007) mixed methods validation framework, given that SNA can be considered an inherently mixed method (Crossley & Edwards, 2016; Froehlich et al., 2020; Froehlich & Brouwer, Forthcoming
Beginning teachers’ professional support as an important asset for teacher retention: A mixed methods social network study
No full textPresentation during the 'Advanced Study Colloquium on Mixed Methods Social Network Analysis' in Vienna (organised by Dominik Froehlich)Presentation during the 'Advanced Study Colloquium on Mixed Methods Social Network Analysis' in Vienna (organised by Dominik Froehlich)
Explanatory sequential research designs on autopilot: Using R Markdown to increase research and evaluation efficiency
No full textIn this paper, we show how automation on the side of the quantitative strand of research may help to alleviate this issue. For that purpose, we focus on explanatory sequential designs, where a quantitative strand of research is followed by a qualitative strand of research (Creswell, 2009). This is a common research design found in MMMR where quantitative results are further explained using qualitative methods (Schoonenboom, Johnson, & Froehlich, 2018). For instance, a survey may be followed by in-depth interviews with individuals from the survey population to help with contextualizing and interpreting the results. We report how R Markdown, a tool for report automation based on R (Froehlich, 2018b; Xie, 2013), may be used to increase research efficiency when applying such designs. We strongly believe that the quantitative strands of explanatory sequential designs lend themselves to such automation in order to free up resources for the (often labor intensive) qualitative strand. Next to increasing research efficiency, this measure is also helpful in aiding practitioners that do want to apply scientific methods, but do not possess the necessary in-depth knowledge about (quantitative) research methods
Decision Making in Individualistic and Collectivistic Cultures
Get PDFHow do cultural values influence individuals\u27 decision making? One would expect answers to this question either from cognitive psychology or from cross-cultural psychology. Cognitive theories on decision making, however, rarely consider the factor of culture, and research in cross-cultural psychology deals only to a small extent with decision making. Therefore the study of culture and decision making is a relatively new and unexplored field. In this paper normative and descriptive approaches to decision making are discussed and three cross-cultural studies on decision making in individualistic and collectivist cultures using different methodologies are described. The results are integrated into a model that can be helpful to derive specific hypotheses for further studies in this field
- …
