Part 3: Operationalising Research Variables

Questions 21–24

Choose the correct letter, A, B, or C.

21 What did Lily find most challenging about defining ‘productivity’?

1. separating it from efficiency
2. finding reliable past studies
3. making it measurable

22 Mark’s research variable ‘academic stress’ will be measured primarily by

1. physiological markers
2. self-reported questionnaires
3. observation by teachers

23 Regarding the sample size, both students agree that

1. 50 participants is sufficient.
2. a larger group reduces bias.
3. finding volunteers will take time.

24 What is their next step for the proposal?

1. drafting the methodology section
2. designing the consent forms
3. consulting the ethics committee

Questions 25–30

Complete the flow-chart below.

Write NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS for each answer.

Designing the survey instrument

Keys

21 C

22 B

23 B

24 B

25 scales

26 definition

27 pilot test

28 ambiguous

29 sequence

30 supervisor

Transcripts

Part 3: You will hear two university students, Lily and Mark, discussing their research methodology assignment.

MARK: Hi Lily. How is the research assignment going? I chose academic stress for my study. What about you?

LILY: Oh, hi Mark. I picked productivity as my primary variable. Trying to separate it from general efficiency wasn’t really necessary in the end, as it just overcomplicates things. Finding reliable past studies to reference was also quite easy, considering the massive amount of available literature. But making it measurable for our specific experiment proved surprisingly difficult. I spent days figuring out how to quantify such a broad concept.

MARK: Right, quantifying abstract ideas is always the trickiest hurdle in the social sciences. To measure academic stress, I originally considered using teacher observations, but they are way too subjective and inconsistent across different classes.

LILY: What about tracking physiological markers, like measuring heart rates or cortisol levels before major exams?

MARK: I thought about that, but the medical equipment required is way too expensive and the whole process is highly intrusive for the students. So, I have decided to rely exclusively on self-reported questionnaires to gather my primary data. It is the most practical solution.

LILY: That makes a lot of sense. Regarding the sample size, I was thinking that grabbing about fifty participants would be sufficient for a preliminary study.

MARK: I strongly disagree, Lily. With a sample of only fifty people, any extreme outliers could seriously skew the statistical results. A significantly larger group reduces potential bias, which is absolutely crucial for maintaining the overall validity of the study.

LILY: You are completely right. I hadn’t thought about the detrimental impact of outliers enough. Let us definitely aim for at least a hundred participants to keep the data perfectly balanced and reliable.

MARK: Agreed. So, where are we currently at with the overall proposal document? Do you think we should start drafting the methodology section today?

LILY: Well, we actually finished the rough draft of that specific section last Wednesday in the library, remember?

MARK: Oh, yeah. My mistake. We probably need to consult the university ethics committee next to get clearance.

LILY: We cannot do that until all our supplementary documentation is completely ready for them to review. The absolute immediate priority right now is designing the consent forms so we have them prepared for the ethical review board.

MARK: Good point. I will start drafting those legal documents tonight. Moving on to designing the actual survey instrument, what is the standard protocol for developing that?

LILY: Well, step one is diving into the existing literature. We shouldn’t just invent our own random items from scratch. Instead, we must search for thoroughly validated scales that previous researchers have successfully implemented in similar studies.

MARK: Okay, I will look up established metrics on the university database tomorrow. Once we find those, what comes next?

LILY: Before actually selecting the specific items to include, we absolutely must establish a clear definition for our unique context, otherwise we run the risk of measuring the wrong psychological construct entirely.

MARK: Right, pinning down exactly what we mean. Once that is settled, should we send the initial survey draft straight out to the main participant group to save time?

LILY: Definitely not, that would be a complete disaster. We have to run a small pilot test with a handful of our classmates first to see exactly how the instrument performs in reality.

MARK: Ah, yes. That way we can see if anyone gets confused by the wording and then analyse their detailed feedback.

LILY: Exactly. The primary goal of this peer review phase is to identify and eliminate any ambiguous phrasing that might lead to inconsistent or totally useless answers from the respondents.

MARK: I always hate vague survey questions. So we fix the wording. Is that the final step?

LILY: Not quite. Sometimes the individual wording is perfectly fine, but the overall layout causes participant fatigue. So we have to carefully adjust the sequence of the items to guarantee a smooth, logical flow from start to finish.

MARK: The psychological order definitely matters a lot. Finally, before we launch and collect the real data, we must submit the completed drafted version to our supervisor for ultimate approval.

LILY: Yes, we definitely need her official green light before we proceed to the data collection phase. Let’s get to work!