Rethinking ‘quantitative’ methods and the development of new researchers

Review of Education

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 72-96

  Gorard, Stephen ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85179266546     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20496613     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rev3.3041     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Acharya, A. B. (2014) Forensic dental age estimation by measuring root dentin translucency area using a new digital technique, Journal of Forensic Sciences, 59(3), 763–768.
2. Altman, D. & Bland, M. (2005) Standard deviations and standard errors, British Medical Journal, 331, 903. doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7521.903.
3. Anand, M. & Narasimha, Y. (2013) Removal of salt and pepper noise from highly corrupted images using mean deviation statistical parameter, International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering, 5(2), 113–119.
4. Behaghel, L., Crepon, B., Gurgand, M. & Le Barbanchon, T. (2009) Sample attrition bias in randomized surveys: a tale of two surveys, IZA Discussion Paper 4162. Available online at: http://ftp.iza.org/dp4162.pdf (accessed 6 July 2014).
5. Berk, R. (2004) Regression analysis: A constructive critique (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage).
6. Berk, R. & Freedman, D. (2001) Statistical assumptions as empirical commitments. Available online at: http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~census/berk2.pdf (accessed 3 July 2014).
7. Bland, M. (2003) Cluster randomised trials in the medical literature. Available online at: http://epi.klinikum.uni-muenster.de/StatMethMed/2003/Freiburg/Folien/MartinBland.pdf (accessed 25 April 2006).
8. Camilli, G. (1996) Standard errors in educational assessment: a policy analysis perspective, Education Policy Analysis Archives, 4(4), 1–17.
9. Carver, R. (1978) The case against statistical significance testing, Harvard Educational Review, 48, 378–399.
10. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011) Research methods in education (7th edn) (London: Routledge).
11. Cooper, L. & Shore, F. (2008) Students’ misconceptions in interpreting center and variability of data represented via histograms and stem-and-leaf plots, Journal of Statistics Education, 16(2).
12. Cuddeback, G., Wilson, E., Orme, J. & Combs-Orme, T. (2004) Detecting and statistically correcting sample selection bias, Journal of Social Service Research, 30(3), 19–30.
13. Cumming, G. (2013) The new statistics: Why and how, Psychological Science, 27, 7–29.
14. Dolton, P., Lindeboom, M. & Van den Berg, G. (2000) Survey Attrition: A taxonomy and the search for valid instruments to correct for biases, Paper given at Attrition Conference (Berlin). Available online at http://www.fcsm.gov/99papers/berlin.html (accessed 14 July 2014).
15. Ernst, M. (2004) Permutation methods: A basis for exact inference, Statistical Science, 19(4), 676–685.
16. Falk, R. & Greenbaum, C. (1995) Significance tests die hard: The amazing persistence of a probabilistic misconception, Theory and Psychology, 5, 75–98.
17. Frank, K., Maroulis, S., Doung, M. & Kelcey, B. (2013) What would it take to change an inference? Using Rubin's causal model to interpret the robustness of causal inferences, Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(4), 437–460.
18. Freedman, D. (2004) Sampling, in M. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman & T. Liao (Eds), Sage encyclopaedia of social science research methods (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage), 987–991.
19. Glass, G. (2014) Random selection, random assignment and Sir Ronald Fisher, Psychology of Education Review, 38(1), 12–13.
20. Goldstein, H. (2008) Evidence and education policy—some reflections and allegations, Cambridge Journal of Education, 38(3), 393–400.
21. Gorard, S. (2002) Fostering scepticism: The importance of warranting claims, Evaluation and Research in Education, 16(3), 136–149.
22. Gorard, S. (2004) The British Educational Research Association and the future of educational research, Educational Studies, 30(1), 65–76.
23. Gorard, S. (2005) Revisiting a 90-year-old debate: The advantages of the mean deviation, The British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), 417–430.
24. Gorard, S. (2006) Towards a judgement-based statistical analysis, British Journal of Sociology of Education, 27(1), 67–80.
25. Gorard, S. (2010) All evidence is equal: The flaw in statistical reasoning, Oxford Review of Education, 36(1), 63–77.
26. Gorard, S. (2013a) Research design: Robust approaches for the social sciences (London: Sage).
27. Gorard, S. (2013b) The possible advantages of the mean absolute deviation ‘effect’ size, Social Research Update, 65(Winter), 1–4. Available online at: http://sru.soc.surrey.ac.uk/SRU64.pdf.
28. Gorard, S. (2014a) The widespread abuse of statistics by researchers: What is the problem and what is the ethical way forward?, Psychology of Education Review, 38(1), 3–10.
29. Gorard, S. (2014b) Confidence intervals, missing data and imputation, International Journal of Research in Educational Methodology, 5(3), 693–698.
30. Gorard, S. (2014c) A proposal for judging the trustworthiness of research findings, Radical Statistics, 110, 47–60.
31. Gorard, S. (2015a) Introducing the mean absolute deviation ‘effect’ size, International Journal Research and Methods in Education, 38(2), 108–114.
32. Gorard, S. (2015b) An absolute deviation approach to assessing correlation, British Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Sciences, 5(1), 73–81.
33. Gorard, S. & Gorard, J. (2015) The number of counterfactual cases needed to disturb a finding: A new approach to summarising scale, effect size and attrition. Available online at https://www.dur.ac.uk/resources/education/Numberneedtodisturb.pdf (accessed 18 April 2015).
34. Hampel, F. (1997) Is statistics too difficult?, Research Report 81, Seminar für Statistik, Eidgenössiche Technische Hochschule, Switzerland.
35. Hansen, M. & Hurwitz, W. (1946) The problem of non-response in sample surveys, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 41, 517–529.
36. Harlow, L., Mulaik, S. & Steiger, J. (1997) What if there were no significance tests? (Mawah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum).
37. Higgins, J. P. T. & Green, S. (Eds) (2011) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available online from www.cochrane-handbook.org (accessed 7 April 2015).
38. Ioannidis, J. (2005) Why most published research findings are false, PLoS Med, August 2005; 2(8), e124. Available online at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/ (accessed 6 July 2014).
39. Kish, L. (1965) Survey sampling (New York, John Wiley).
40. Lindner, J., Murphy, T. & Briers, G. (2001) Handling non-response in social science research, Journal of Agricultural Education, 42(3), 43–53.
41. Lipsey, M., Puzio, K., Yun, C., Hebert, M., Steinka-Fry, K., Cole, M., Roberts, M., Anthony, K. & Busick, M. (2012) Translating the statistical representation of the effects of education interventions into more readily interpretable forms (Washington DC: Institute of Education Sciences), 13.
42. Ludbrook, J. & Dudley, H. (1998) Why permutation tests are superior to t and F tests in biomedical research, The American Statistician, 52(2), 127–132.
43. Matthews, R. (1998) Flukes and flaws, Prospect, 20 November 1998. Available online at http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/features/flukesandflaws (accessed 14 July 2014).
44. McIntyre, D. & McIntyre, A. (2000) Capacity for research into teaching and learning (Swindon: Report to the ESRC Teaching and Learning Research Programme).
45. Meehl, P. (1967) Theory-testing in psychology and physics: A methodological paradox, Philosophy of Science, 34, 103–115.
46. Murtonen, M. & Lehtinen, E. (2003) Difficulties experienced by education and sociology students in quantitative methods courses, Studies in Higher Education, 28(2), 171–185.
47. Peers, I. (1996) Statistical analysis for education and psychology researchers (London: Falmer Press).
48. Peress, M. (2010) Correcting for survey nonresponse using variable response propensity, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 105(492), 1418–1430.
49. Phillips, D. (2014) Research in the grad sciences, and in the very hard ‘softer’ sciences, Educational Researcher, 43(1), 9–11.
50. Pigott, T., Valentince, J., Polanin, J., Williams, R. & Canada, D. (2013) Outcome-reporting bias in education research, Educational Researcher, 42(8), 424–432.
51. Platt, J. (2012) Making them count: How effective has official encouragement of quantitative methods been in British sociology?, Current Sociology, 60(5), 690–704.
52. Rhoads, C. (2014) Under what circumstances does external knowledge about the correlation structure improve power in cluster randomized designs?, Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 7(2), 205–224.
53. Robinson, D. (2004) An interview with Gene Glass, Educational Researcher, 33(3), 26–30.
54. Sheikh, K. & Mattingly, S. (1981) Investigating nonresponse bias in mail surveys, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 35, 293–296.
55. Siegel, S. (1956) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences (Tokyo: McGraw Hill).
56. Simmons, J., Nelson, L. & Simonsohn, U. (2011) False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant, Psychological Science, 11, 1359–1366.
57. Wandt, E., Adams, G. W., Collett, D. M., Michael, W. B., Ryans, D. G. & Shay, C. B. (1965) An evaluation of educational research published in journals, Report of the Committee on Evaluation of Research, American Educational Research Association, unpublished report.
58. Watts, D. (1991) Why is introductory statistics difficult to learn?, The American Statistician, 45(4), 290–291.
59. White, P. (2014) Against inferential statistics, Psychology of Education Review, 38(1), 24–28.