Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Methods
Research Design
the researchers will use the experiences of young investors in answering the research
questions specifically the risk in investing at a young age and on how they reduce these
risks.
There a lot of authors who defined qualitative research. According to Bryman and
Bell (2007), a qualitative research signifies the relationship between research and
theory, and it commonly focuses on how theories were formulated. It also allows the
researchers to gather facts and not abstract ideas. Under qualitative approach is the
Phenomenology design is the most appropriate design for our research because
we, the researchers, will be using the experiences of the young investors of Ateneo de
Davao Senior High School. We will be using the risks or the challenges that they
encountered in investing at a young age and on how do they reduce these risks.
1
Research Participants
In our study, we used 5-10 participants. Having 5 as our minimum for our
qualitative interview works very well especially when the participants are homogeneous.
Having 10 participants as our maximum reduces some of the bias and validity threats
present in a qualitative research. Crouch and McKenzie (2006) proposed that less than
relationship and thus improve the “open” and “frank” exchange of information.
The group also agreed to have 5-10 participants for their research study for it is
more ideal and it is also the recommended number of participants. It is also less
challenging for the group to only have a small number of participants because there are
not a lot of entrepreneurs in Ateneo de Davao University. Also, even though it is only a
Davao University and should be a student and of course, a participant should have his
We, the researchers, explicated the risk that young investors experienced at a
young age specifically in the students of Ateneo de Davao University. We applied the
through voice recording and by taking down notes of what each participant have
2
asserted. We cited the sources to each theory and article that we’ve copied from the
books and internet. We conducted the coding, theming, and discussion to establish a
thematic idea about our study and also to transform the data into a form suitable for
computer-aided analysis.
Data Source
Salkind (2010) namely primary data and secondary data sources. A primary data source
is an original data source, in which the data is collected first hand by the researcher.
Primary data in a qualitative research can be collected in various ways and the most
common are interviews and field observation. On the other hand, Santiago Canyon
College stated that secondary data sources describe, discuss, interpret, comment upon,
or articles found in scholarly journals that discuss or evaluate someone else's original
research.
type of data source would be primary data sources specifically interviews. Moreover,
University of Hertfordshire stresses that interviews are the key source of data gathering
where human participants are involved. Using interviews as a data source has its own
benefits since it gives the researchers the control to external influences as well as the
opportunity to monitor non-verbal replies and the effect that questions may have on the
3
participants. Also by using secondary type of sources, we can support the idea and
Using data sources as a way to provide ideas and evidences are necessary in
conducting a research since this will prove the credibility of the study. Primary and
secondary data sources are very useful in research for it helps the researchers in
completing the study. This will also serve as a guide and support to the researchers’
work. In a qualitative study, using interviews as a way of collecting the views and ideas
of the researchers’ participants is the most suitable way since interviews are more in-
Data Collection
and quantitative data collection methods. Qualitative data collection methods may use
methods are much structured as compared to the qualitative data collection method.
Moreover, Harrell and Bradley (2009) stated that the appropriate techniques
should be used in data collection methods in order to enhance the accuracy, validity,
and reliability of research findings. They also stated that through using interview, we
would be able to collect information from individuals about their practices, beliefs, and
opinions. We would also be able to gather information about the past and present
in order to gain information that will be useful for this research. Gill et al. (2008) stated
that semi-structured interviews are very helpful to define the areas to be explored and it
4
also allows the researcher to diverge in order to gain more knowledge about the
participant.
As the researchers, we were aware that we should take thorough steps in the
data collection. In this study, the following steps were followed to ensure the completion
of the study:
our target participants in the study. Second, we set an appointment with the chosen
target participants for the target date of our interview with them. Third, we conducted the
interview with the participants. Written notes and audio recordings were taken during
the interview. Lastly, with the use of the written notes and audio recordings, we
transcribed it and analyzed the data we have gathered. To ensure the safety of the
data, all the transcribed recordings and notes will be stored on a flash drive and were
Data Analysis
by having the interview audio recordings transcribed. This includes the verbatim
statements of the interviewees. Also, through analyzing data, bracketing is also needed
to be practiced. Bracketing is where the researcher focuses more on the answer of the
interviewee rather than pushing his or her own expected answers from the interviewee.
In this way, we will be given a wider knowledge of the topic through the perception of
other people.
5
In our group, we transcribed the audio recordings we have gathered from the
interviews we conducted. Each member was given a copy in order to correct and verify
the content if it coincides with the written notes we have gathered as well. Afterward, the
edited version of the transcription was further corrected for grammatical errors. The
written notes from the interview underwent proofreading and verification by the
When all the data has been collected, verified, and corrected, we proceeded with
the analysis of the data gathered. The written notes and the transcription from the
interview were further elaborated by connecting the notes to the transcription. In this
way, we were given the context on why the participants had that kind of answer. The
major topics in the interview such as the investing experience and the fears of young
investors was written on different topics and the answers of the participants was
thoroughly analyzed. Statements that may provide strong evidence was written in the
addressed within the same manner in naturalistic work. Nonetheless, many writers on
analysis ways, notably Silverman, have demonstrated how qualitative researchers will
incorporate measures that deal with these problems, and investigators like Pitts have
6
qualitative studies. Several naturalistic investigators have, however, preferred to use
One such author is Guba, who proposes four criteria that he believes should be
similar problems, Guba’s constructs correspond to the standards used by the positivist
mid-1990s, Lincoln wrote that the full space of qualitative inquiry was “still rising and
being defined”, Guba’s constructs are accepted by several. This paper considers the
standards well and suggests provisions that the qualitative investigator might use to
satisfy them. The methods advocated area unit supported the expertise gained by
is that of internal validity, within which they look for to make sure that their study
investigator’s equivalent conception, i.e. believability, deals with the question, “How
congruent area unit the findings with reality?” Lincoln and Guba argue that
analyzers to push confidence that they need accurately recorded the phenomena
beneath scrutiny: a) the adoption of research ways well established each within the
7
qualitative investigation generally and in information processing specifically. Rule
ideas being studied”. Thus, the particular procedures used, like the line of questioning
pursued within the knowledge gathering sessions and therefore the ways of
information analysis, ought to be derived, wherever possible, from people who have
has proved particularly influential in this regard. In their study of the data wants of
Seattle’s residents, Dervin et al. at the start invited participants to mirror situations
“Where you required help? Wherever you didn’t perceive something? Wherever did
you require making a decision what to do? Or wherever you were disturbed regarding
one of these classes. Similar methods are used after by Chen and Hernon, Poston-
Transferability. Merriam writes that external validity “is concerned with the
extent that the findings of one study are often applied to different situations”. In
positivist work, the priority typically lies in demonstrating that the results of the work on
hand are often applied to a wider population. Since the findings of a qualitative project
area unit specific to a tiny low range of explicit environments and people, it's not
possible to demonstrate that the findings and conclusions area unit applicable to
different things and populations. Erlandson et al. note that several representational
inquirers believe that, in practice, even typical generalisability is never possible as all
observations area unit outlined by the particular contexts within which they occur. A
8
contrasting view is offered by Stake and Denscombe, who counsel that, though every
case could also be distinctive, it's also an example within a broader cluster and, as a
approach are often pursued solely with caution since, as Gomm, Hammersley, and
Foster acknowledge, it seems to belittle the importance of the contextual factors that
hit the case. Bassey proposes that, if practitioners believe their situations to be almost
like that represented within the study, they'll relate the findings to their own positions.
Lincoln and Guba and Firestone are among people who present an identical
argument and recommend that it's the responsibility of the investigator to make sure
that decent contextual data regarding the fieldwork sites is provided to enable the
reader to create such a transfer. They maintain that, since the investigator is aware of
recent years such a stance has found favor with several qualitative researchers. When
poring over the outline inside the analysis report of the context within which the work
was undertaken, readers should verify how far they'll be assured in transferring to
different things the results and conclusions are given. It’s also necessary that
permit readers to have a correct understanding of it, thereby enabling them to check
the instances of the phenomenon described within the analysis report with those that
employs techniques to point out that, if the work were recurrent, within the same
context, with similar ways, and with similar participants, similar results would be
9
obtained. However, as Fidel and Marshall and Rossman note, the ever-changing
investigator’s observations area unit tied to things of the study, tilt that the “published
descriptions area unit static and frozen within the ‘ethnographic present’”. Lincoln and
Guba stress the shut ties between believability and responsibility, arguing that, in
practice, a demonstration of the previous goes far in guaranteeing the latter. This
could be achieved through the utilization of “overlapping methods”, like the main target
In order to handle the reliability issue more directly, the processes inside the
the work, if not essential to achieve similar results. Thus, the research style could also
enable readers of the analysis report back to develop a radical understanding of the
ways and their effectiveness, the text ought to include sections dedicated to a) the
research style and its implementation, describing what was planned and dead on a
strategic level; b) the operational detail of knowledge gathering, addressing the trivia
of what was wiped out the field; c) reflective appraisal of the project, evaluating the
10
tests and questionnaires are designed by humans, the intrusion of the researcher’s
way as the potential that the work’s findings area unit the results of the experiences
and ideas of the informants, instead of the characteristics and preferences of the
investigator.
stressed, in this context to scale back the result of investigator bias. Miles and
Huberman consider that a key criterion for confirmability is that the extent to which the
investigator admits his or her own predispositions. To the current end, beliefs
underpinning choices created and ways adopted ought to be acknowledged inside the
analysis report, the explanations for favoring one approach when others might have
been taken explained and weaknesses within the techniques truly used admitted. In
terms of results, preliminary theories that ultimately weren't borne out by the
information should also be mentioned. A lot of the content in respect to these areas
could also be derived from the continued “reflective commentary”. Once more, an in-
depth method description allows the reader to see how far the information and
Critical to the current method is the “audit trail” that permits any observer to
trace the course of the analysis in small stages via the selections created and
procedures represented. The “audit trail” could also be described graphically. 2 such
diagrams could also be created. One might take a data-oriented approach, showing,
11
was gathered and processed throughout the course of the study. This is often what's
generally understood by the term, “audit trail”. Additionally, however, the style in which
the ideas inherent within the analysis question gave rise to the work to follow could
also be tracked. This more theoretical “audit trail”, that ought to be understood in
terms of the full of the length of the project, could also be portrayed in a second
diagram.
Ethical Consideration
The ethical standards that are present in our study are anonymity, Informed
used other than that for which permission was obtained. Researchers should always
remember that the authorities being asked of permission should be credible enough to
give the permission needed. Researchers need to carefully consider whether they
The Ohio State University stated that informed consent should be obtained
after the participant has been presented with pertinent information has had adequate
time to review the consent document and have all questions answered. Consent
should be given before conducting any study specific procedures. Participant privacy
12
during the discussion is very vital and the environment of inquiring information should
be free of any possible influence and coercion from the research team.
from unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, loss or theft are some of the
ethical duty of confidentiality. Fulfilling these obligations is very essential to secure the
trust in the relationship between the researcher and the participant and to the honesty
13