A500.7.3.RB_SchreterPaul

After going through some slides on quantitative research, I’ve been able to define (in a basic sense) on what quantitative research actually is. Hoepfl was able to define it as something that “uses experimental methods and quantitative measures to test hypothetical generalizations.” (Hoepfl, 1997) It provides a unique opportunity in allowing insight that qualitative research cannot. The basic idea behind this blog post it to identify two major elements of what quantitative research can provide: The first being that it enables us to observe the non-observable and the second being that it allows for comparisons between groups.

An element that defines what quantitative research is, is that it “enables research and description of social structures and processes that are not directly observable.” (Mamia, 2013) For example Dan Ariely commented on some research that was conducted and part of that research showed that Sweden had an 86% organ donation rate within its country. (Ariely, 2013) Organ donation rate isn’t something that one can directly observe and so the collection of data allows for such observation. This also shows that we are able to come up with simple conclusions about various articles of data.

Another element that helps define what quantitative research is that it is well suited for “comparisons between groups, areas etc.” (Mamia, 2013) To comment on Dan Ariely’s presentation, we were able to conclude that countries that had an opt-in organ donation service had less donation rates than those countries that had an opt-out organ donation service. (Ariely, 2013) This shows that we were able to collect a large amount of data and come up with conclusions and comparisons between two major groups of populations that otherwise wouldn’t have been directly observable.

The two major elements being quantitative research is that it allows us to observe the un-observable and to allow for comparisons between groups of bodies. Quantitative research takes on a form much similar to that of early level physics classes that one would take in sixth form or Uni, where students could potentially create a hypothesis and then test that hypotheses against a collection of data/tests. This provides an incredible opportunity to develop a deeper understanding on the various interests.

References

Ariely, D. (2013). Dan Ariely: Are we in control of our own decisions? Retrieved from TED: http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_ariely_asks_are_we_in_control_of_our_own_decisions.html

Hoepfl, M. (1997). Choosing Qualitative Research: A Primer for Technology Education Researchers. Retrieved from Journal of Technology Education: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v9n1/hoepfl.html

Mamia, T. (2013). Quantitative Research Methods. Retrieved from ISSS: https://erau.blackboard.com/bbcswebdav/pid-13030312-dt-content-rid-38257535_4/institution/Worldwide_Online/MSLD_Program/MSLD_500/msld_500_quant_research_methods_lecture1_tero_mamia.pdf

A500.6.3.GA_SchreterPaul

After reading an article on qualitative research, I’ve been able to come up with a basic idea on what it is and what it might be trying to accomplish. The alternative would be quantitative research and that has a different approach to research. But for starters, qualitative research is defined as a method that “uses a naturalistic approach that seeks to understand phenomena in context-specific settings.” (Hoepfl, 1997) So to go over what this blog is going to cover, it’ll start out with what qualitative research is not going to be (and what quantitative is), followed by some the characteristics of qualitative research, and finally some of the data collection strategies associated with qualitative research.

               First off we’ll need to help define what qualitative research is not by defining what quantitative research is. For example, Hoepfl in her article defines quantitative research as something that “uses experimental methods and quantitative measures to test hypothetical generalizations.” (Hoepfl, 1997) To more or less take another approach to this definition, it would be saying that quantitative research takes a stab at a prediction of how something works and then testing that theory through some sort of experimentation. Similar to your early level physics class in sixth form or Uni, students would create a hypothesis and then test that hypothesis against some number of tests. Qualitative research is different with its approach to a particular area.

               Qualitative research has multiple characteristics that can help put its definition more in context. The first characteristic is that it’s a method that is used to “observe, describe, and interpret settings as they are.” (Hoepfl, 1997) This shows that researchers need to take on a neutral approach and reduce the amount of artificial elements within an arena so that these observations aren’t plagued with foreign content. A completely unbiased view and shade of glasses must be worn when observing a setting. Another characteristic is that qualitative research is “judged using special criteria for trustworthiness.” (Hoepfl, 1997) In other words, are the findings of the research going to be worth grabbing the attention of those interested in the research? How naturalistic is the information of the study going to be? It can be said that qualitative research is simply a means to which to identify the variables required for data collection.

               Data collection is possible with qualitative research and it has a number of strategies involved with the process. One of the many strategies is to determine the focus of the inquiry. This includes establishing a set of boundaries that involve certain types of white list / black list type criteria. Dan Ariely for example could have established a set of boundaries in his studies to not include drunk people, which would have saved him a lot of time, frustration, and moral dilemma in regards to one of his own studies. (Ariely, 2011) A second strategy is to determine the type of instrumentation to be used. This can range from using survey taking websites to questionnaires handed out in a room. This figure out a means to actually collect the data within the research. While there are a good number of other strategies also involved in data collection, these two are the ones that I find that stick out the most.

               To review I just went over some of the characteristics of quantitative research, some of the characteristics of qualitative research, and finally some of the characteristics of sound strategies involved with data collection within the realm of qualitative research. The idea of qualitative research certainly takes on a different approach to other traditional ideas, however it certainly is a valid one. While personally I do like the idea of collecting data first and then interpreting that data, this approach of observing how things really are before going about methods to confirm the validity of these observations brings on different take on how I can approach future research.

References

Ariely, D. (2011). Dan Ariely: Beware conflicts of interest. Retrieved from TED: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/dan_ariely_beware_conflicts_of_interest.html

Hoepfl, M. (1997). Choosing Qualitative Research: A Primer for Technology Education Researchers. Retrieved from Journal of Technology Education: http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v9n1/hoepfl.html

A500.5.3.RB_SchreterPaul

Half way through the course and now it’s time to reflect on what I’ve learned and what I’ve been able to adopt into my life. Unfortunately though, I don’t really feel any different than when I first started this course. Granted, I have adopted some changes into my life in terms of clarifying my thinking with others (aka SEE-I method), I’m not sure if this is enough. This to me brings up some concerns because I’m starting to wonder if I’m missing the major points of this course. I haven’t had any time to reflect on my past assignments nor do I feel like I can spend time on my current assignments because I’m constantly feeling rushed (near 100 hour work weeks aren’t exactly helping the situation). But all that aside, let’s look at how I’ve adopted SEE-I.

               The SEE-I method has proven to be very successful in my life because it has allowed me to better explain my ideas to others. For a while it’s been hard for me to articulate my thoughts to others, however with SEE-I (mostly the “I” portion) things have become noticeably easier. For example when I was talking with a newbie in regards to how a particular system works on the F-15E, I was able to state what the system does and how it operates, state its practical use in real life war, and finally state a metaphor using fly’s and bats to help solidify the understanding of the particular system. By the end of the day she was able to understand exactly how the system worked. Much like expressing the story of Shakespeare over multiple forms of media/entertainment. When you read the story of The Taming of the Shrew, watch the play of The Taming of the Shrew, and finally watch the film The Taming of the Shrew, the story of The Taming of the Shrew becomes pretty concrete because of all the different forms it’s been experienced in.

               SEE-I alone has given me a new way to think and a new way to articulate and explain something to someone. I’m certainly glad that I’ve been introduced to it and encouraged to use it throughout my works. While I do fear that I'm not learning everything that I should be learning (or at least gaining the grasp of), I can say that so far I've been able to walk away with something.

A500.4.3.RB_SchreterPaul

After watching an incredible TED video of Dr. Sheena Lyengar, I’ve been able to revel in my newfound observations on life and choice. It’s been rather eye opening for both myself and how I perceive choice, and how I view others in making their own choice. Today I am going to comment on three assumptions that Dr. Lyengar makes in her video and how it’s been a part of my life. The three assumptions are that Americans believe they should make their own choice, they believe more options lead to better choice, and that they believe everyone should never say no to choice.

The first assumption that Dr. Lyengar makes is that Americans believe they should make their own choices (independent of others). What this means is that those of a particular cultural upbringing believe that only they know best when it comes to decisions that affect them. However in her study she was able to conclude that while those of an Anglo-American upbringing performed best in anagram solving when they perceive their actions as their own choice, Asian-American individuals performed best in anagram solving when they perceived their actions as being directed by their mothers. What this shows is that people of certain backgrounds may be more open to manipulation, provided that this particular individual looks up to another as someone they trust and respect. This especially holds true for myself (because I come from an Asian-American upbringing) when it comes to dating girls, because in the back of my mind I always think about whether or not my family (mainly mom and dad) would approve. If I think my family would disapprove, I don’t go near the girl.

In many overseas assignments, fresh Airman are separated from their friends and families. This creates a special bond between individuals in the flight and in essence, the Air Force becomes their new family. Flight chiefs essentially play the role of mommy and daddy as they are ultimately responsible for an Airman’s well-being. Through Dr. Lyengar’s first assumption, if flight chiefs can develop the trust and respect of an Airman, they may be able to shape the Airman’s decisions to more closely match the goals of the Air Force. If a potential deployment were to come up where manning is already critically numbered and an Airman has a choice between getting stationed in the states or extending to see a deployment, a flight chief has the potential to nudge the Airman towards deploying which helps achieve the mission.

The second assumption that Dr. Lyengar makes about American thinking is that more options lead to better choice. What this means is that when an individual has an increased number of selections to choose from, they will be capable of rationalizing the best choice that provides them with the most benefit. However, “a number of [her] studies have shown that when you give people 10 or more options when they’re making a choice, they make poorer decisions.” This is especially true with my dating life. Ever since I broke up with my Kindergarten girlfriend, I was reluctant to get another because I always knew that there would be better. Well look 19 years later into my life and see where that’s gotten me. Indecision was a poor decision made on my part because of the large selection of options that were presented to me. Luckily though, there is some light at the end of the tunnel so hold the pity until at least this weekend (haha).

So how does this affect leadership? Well it seems fairly obvious that in order to help someone make a wiser decision that the number of choices need to be reduced. I was able to see this happen with one of my working buddies. Before he had zero intention on staying overseas and wanted to go back to the states. He said the whole process of extending is so complicated that it’s a huge pain in the butt to even think about it (we’re given about 6 options when it comes to extending, however each option branches outward leading to many other decisions). My flight chief was able to virtually limit the number of options he had to: not extend or extend for 9 months. Putting it in simple terms like this made the whole process easier to think about for my buddy and now he’s actually considering about staying. Being incredibly short manned already, this leads to a better outcome for the overall Air Force mission of this base.

The third assumption that Dr. Lyengar makes about American thinking is that everyone should never say no to choice. What this means is that one should never faithfully put the decisions of one’s own life into someone else’s hands. Dr. Lyengar concluded through her studies that when a choice has to be made between two terribly bad decisions, that overall happiness is better when the choice is made by an outsider. This was especially true for me while growing up. I always hated it when the teacher in grade school tells everyone to partner up and it puts me in a situation of choosing between two friends. I like both friends equally, but choosing one with hurt my relationship with the other. However when the teacher chooses for me, everyone understands that it was an outsider that made the decision and not myself. This would lead to a better overall happiness from all parties.

So how would this translate into being a leader? Well what this means is that if a leader wants to increase overall follower happiness, that they should remove choice from the followers hands and make the decisions themselves. However this poses a problem. Dr. Lyengar asked a number of American parents who had just lost their child whether or not if they would have preferred an outsider make the decision of killing life support. Every single one said they would have rather made their own choice, even if it meant an overall increase in depression and sadness for themselves. What this could potentially mean (and where we have room to learn), is that while leaders could increase follower happiness if they removed choice from the followers hands, that the action could potentially hurt the overall relationship between follower and leader. As said before with the Dr. Lyengar’s first assumption, if trust and respect are the key to influencing someone’s decision, increasing their happiness (for their benefit) may reduce the amount of trust and respect one has with this person. So when it comes to the [Air Force] mission, where would a moral leader stand? Increasing a followers happiness but lose influence, or decrease their happiness and gain influence?

The three assumptions made by Dr. Lyengar are that Americans believe they should make their own choice, they believe more options lead to better choice, and that they believe everyone should never say no to choice. I was able to reflect how these were able to relate to my own life and I commented a little about how a leader could potentially look at these assumptions and apply it to their own decision making. I’m really grateful to have watched this video because it has given me a new perspective on how others perceive choice and it has helped solidify my own understanding on how I perceive choice.

References

Iyengar, S. (2010, Jul). Sheena Iyengar: The art of choosing. Retrieved from TED: http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/sheena_iyengar_on_the_art_of_choosing.html

A500.3.4.RB_SchreterPaul

How is the scholarly information you found in the library different from the typical information you find when you Google a leadership concept?

Already this seems like a loaded/biased question because it implies that everything in the Hunt Library is more scholarly than the implied less-than-scholarly information found in Google. Well, based on my basic nosing around of the two sources, I find this to be true. Based on my finding, I’ve found the Hunt Library to be different in that there are more scholarly results when compared to Google and that it allows a more specific, narrowing of sources.

So far it appears as if the results of the Hunt Library are more scholarly in nature than that found of Google. Immediately after doing a search within the Hunt Library I am given dissertations, articles, books, etc. This means that a wide range of credible sources at are my disposal. Google however, while it does have some credible sources, some of the information leads to websites that are complete junk. At least this way with the Hunt Library, the results are rather consistent.

The additional benefit that I’ve noticed with the Hunt Library is the fact that it allows for a narrowing of sources. For example I can limit the searches to only newspaper articles or a search that only includes publications. Depending on the type of information that I’m looking for, I can try to find a basic newspaper article that will most likely go over the highlights of what I’m researching and possibly point me in the right direction for other sources or I can try to find a thesis or research paper that’s already done some heavy duty research and use it to my advantage.

So how is the information found in the library different than that found on Google? First it’s the fact that the majority of first page search results on the Hunt Library is more scholarly in nature and second I can narrow the search results found on the Hunt Library. This allows me to more easily find credible information on the topics that I am trying to research.